formatRange

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

The description does not add significant behavioral transparency beyond the annotation readOnlyHint=false. It mentions 'via LSP formatter' which implies standard behavior, but lacks details on side effects, undo capability, or error states.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes a performance comparison. No wasted words, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

The description covers the core functionality but lacks details on return values, error conditions, or prerequisites (e.g., file must be open, LSP active). Given the simplicity of the tool, it is minimally adequate but not fully 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?

Since the input schema has 100% description coverage for each parameter, the description does not add new meaning. It provides minimal extra context beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 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 it formats a line range using LSP formatter, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool formatDocument by highlighting it is faster for large files, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this tool ('for large files' to be faster than full formatDocument), implying a choice between range vs full formatting. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions beyond the comparison with formatDocument.

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