aide_inspect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions what is returned (JSDoc, signature, kind) and the search scope (TypeScript/JavaScript files). However, it does not disclose behavior on missing symbols, performance, or side effects. Given no annotations, this is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences: first sentence states purpose concisely, second sentence provides usage guidance and parameter hint. No superfluous words, front-loaded, and every sentence 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?

Given no output schema, the description covers returned data (JSDoc, signature, kind) and file types. It explains the 'Tier 2 progressive disclosure' context and when to use. Missing error behavior details, but for a simple inspect tool, it is reasonably 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds usage context for the optional file parameter ('use to narrow search when location is known'), which goes beyond schema. Baseline is 3 due to full schema coverage, plus extra value earns a 4.

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 explicitly states it returns JSDoc, signature, and kind for a named symbol without opening the full file. It uses specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'Tier 2 progressive disclosure'.

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 clear guidance on when to use this tool (when an agent knows a function name from an import list or orchestrator file) and mentions the optional file parameter to narrow search. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives but context implies when full file is needed, use aide_read.

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