search_symbol

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

The description discloses key behaviors: uses auto-detected backend, returns a token-capped list without source bodies, and is not grep. It covers what the tool does and does not do, despite no annotations.

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?

The description is concise, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value without redundancy. It efficiently packages all essential information.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple backends, grep alternative) and lack of output schema, the description fully explains what it returns (kind name @ file:line) and its limitations, making it contextually complete.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds context to each parameter: explains q as name/substring, projectPath default, backend auto-detect, and maxResults default 60, meaningfully supplementing the schema.

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 searches for symbol declarations by name/substring across the project using language server indexes. It distinguishes from grep and specifies supported languages, making the purpose highly specific.

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?

Explicitly advises using this tool instead of Bash grep/rg for finding class/function/type/variable in supported languages, providing clear when-to-use guidance and alternatives.

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