java_document_symbols

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It only states it returns a 'hierarchical outline' but does not disclose read-only nature, error conditions, performance characteristics, or what 'hierarchical outline' entails (e.g., nesting levels, included symbols).

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise, though slightly underspecified for full understanding.

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 no output schema and the tool's purpose (returning a structured outline), the description should explain what the outline contains (e.g., classes, methods) and potential file restrictions. It lacks this completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (both parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get the hierarchical outline of a specific file' clearly specifies the action (get) and resource (hierarchical outline of a file). It distinguishes from siblings like java_workspace_symbols (workspace-level) and java_references (cross-file usage).

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 when needing a file's structural overview, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like java_class_content or java_workspace_symbols. No 'when not to use' or context hints are given.

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