getInlayHints

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description need not restate safety. It adds value by explaining what inlay hints are (inline type annotations, param names) and giving examples, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like performance implications or dependency on language servers.

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?

Single sentence with an example, no fluff. Front-loaded with the core functionality. Every word earns its place.

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?

No output schema is provided, yet the description does not specify the return format (e.g., list of objects with position and text). While the tool's purpose is clear, incomplete return info may hinder an agent's ability to parse results.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description reiterates 'line range', matching startLine and endLine, but adds no new semantics 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 clearly states the tool returns inlay hints (inline type annotations, param names) for a line range, with specific examples (TS types, Rust lifetimes). This distinctively identifies the resource and verb, differentiating it from siblings like getHover or getCodeLens.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., getHover, getDocumentSymbols). The description lacks context about prerequisites, language support, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without comparative decision-making info.

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