get_overloads

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

Although no annotations are provided, the description thoroughly discloses what the tool returns and its behavior (e.g., returns source location only for non-metadata, includes all listed attributes). It does not mention side effects, but as a read-only tool, this is acceptable. Could add note about requiring loaded code, but not critical.

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 well-organized paragraph that front-loads the main purpose. It is concise but covers all necessary details. Slightly verbose in listing all included attributes, but still efficient.

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 has only one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers the tool's purpose, usage, parameter format, return content, exceptions, and sorting. No gaps for typical use.

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 coverage is 100% with a reasonable schema description. The tool description adds value by clarifying the exact format of the symbol parameter with examples ('Greeter.Greet', 'Greeter.Greeter', 'System.Console.WriteLine') and distinguishing method vs constructor notation.

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 it returns every overload of a method or constructor with source and metadata, specifying exactly what is included (full signature, parameter details, return type, etc.) and excluded (operator overloads). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_operators.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: for ordinary methods pass 'Type.Method', for constructors pass 'Type.Type'. Directs users to use get_operators for operator overloads, and specifies sorting order (parameter count ASC, then signature ordinal ASC).

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