aide_inspect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool operates without opening the full file (lightweight), and searches across multiple file extensions (ts, tsx, js, jsx, mjs, cjs). It could mention return format or performance constraints, but overall it is transparent.

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 concise (two sentences plus one additional sentence on file types) and front-loaded with the core functionality. Every sentence adds value, 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?

The description explains the input and what is returned (JSDoc, signature, kind) adequately for a simple lookup tool. No output schema is needed; the description covers the return values. It fits well within the sibling tools context.

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 100% with both parameters described. The description adds context beyond schema: it explains how to use the optional file parameter to narrow the search when location is known. This provides meaningful guidance beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 returns JSDoc, signature, and kind for a named symbol without opening the full file, distinguishing it from siblings like aide_read which opens the full file. The verb 'inspect' and resource 'symbol' are specific.

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 explicitly advises when to use this tool: when an agent knows a function name from an import list or orchestrator file. It also explains the optional file parameter for narrowing search. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools.

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