Find all types that inherit from or implement a given base class or interface, such as FormBase or IStateMachine, to identify derived types in the bot framework source.
Find types that inherit from / implement base (e.g. FormBase, ControlBase, IStateMachine).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| base | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the search is recursive, what scope is covered (e.g., entire codebase vs. dependencies), whether abstract types are included, or any performance or safety characteristics.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. The examples in parentheses add useful clarity without verbosity.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, with no annotations and low parameter schema coverage, the description remains minimal and does not fully equip an agent to call the tool correctly in all contexts.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially does by clarifying that `base` refers to a type name and giving examples like FormBase, ControlBase, and IStateMachine, but it does not specify formatting, case sensitivity, or whether fully qualified names are required.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: finding types that inherit from or implement a given base type, with examples that clarify the domain. It is distinct from siblings like get_symbol or search_code, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It only implies its purpose through the action statement.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.