document_symbols

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions a token cap on output. It does not disclose read-only nature, authentication needs, or side effects, leaving gaps for the agent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences front-load the core functionality and a benefit statement. No redundant words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having 4 parameters and no output schema, the description fails to explain how to use optional parameters or what the output format details are. The tool definition feels incomplete for an agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only the 'path' parameter has a basic description in the schema (25% coverage). The description adds no explanation for 'projectPath', 'backend', or 'maxResults', leaving their purpose unclear.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool outlines a single file's symbols in a specific format (kind name @ file:line), distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform search or navigation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies use for quickly understanding file structure without reading the full file, noting it's cheaper. It does not explicitly exclude cases or name alternatives, but the context is clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.