find_symbol

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions result format on miss ('reports which kinds were searched') and default kinds, but does not cover other aspects like performance, side effects, or output structure for non-errors.

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?

Three sentences, each adding value: first states purpose, second gives default behavior + customization, third describes miss feedback. No wasted 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?

Given 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is somewhat short. It hints at output ('file, line, signature') but doesn't detail the structure. For a non-trivial tool, slightly more detail on output and batch mode would improve 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 coverage is 89%, so the schema already documents parameters well. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, mainly the miss reporting behavior tied to kinds. 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 clearly states 'Locate a symbol: file, line, signature, minimal preview', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_codebase by focusing on symbol definitions rather than general text search.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use this tool: for locating symbols, and how to customize with kinds. It lacks explicit exclusions or references to alternatives, but the default behavior and miss reporting give enough context.

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