get_selection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It covers the key edge case by stating it 'returns an empty selection object when nothing is highlighted' and names the return fields. It does not explicitly say the tool has no side effects or describe error behavior, but for a simple getter this is adequate.

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 three sentences with the core action first, then user-facing trigger phrases, then the empty-selection edge case. Each sentence adds distinct value, and there is no fluff or redundancy.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the essential return shape (file path, line range, selected text), the empty case, and clear guidance on when to call it. For a zero-parameter, low-complexity tool, this is complete enough for an agent to invoke and interpret 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, giving this dimension a baseline of 4. The description correctly focuses on output and usage rather than parameters, and there is no parameter information left undocumented.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a precise resource ('the code the user has selected or highlighted in VS Code'), and the return payload (file path, line range, selected text). It also positions itself relative to walkthrough/show_code as a prerequisite step, making the tool's function clear even alongside siblings.

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 explicit trigger phrases ('this code', 'what I've selected', 'the highlighted block') and a workflow rule ('before calling walkthrough/show_code when the user has already selected the code'). It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or list alternative conditions, so it falls just short of full guidance.

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