Get Method By Name

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about what happens when the method isn't found, how overloaded methods are resolved, or whether a partial/empty result is possible. 'Fetch the source code' is the only behavioral claim.

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 no filler. It is efficient, though efficient at the cost of summarizing rather than specifying.

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 needn't be explained, but for a code-retrieval tool with zero annotation coverage and zero parameter documentation, the description omits overload handling, not-found behavior, and how it relates to sibling retrieval tools — leaving real gaps.

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% across three parameters, and the description only implicitly maps to class_name and method_name. The third parameter, method_signature — critical for disambiguating overloads — is never mentioned, so the description fails to compensate for the empty schema.

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: fetch source code of a method in a class. It's clear what the tool does, but it doesn't distinguish itself from close siblings like get_class_source, search_method_by_name, or get_methods_of_class, so an agent can't tell from the description alone which one to reach for.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus search_method_by_name or get_class_source, and no mention of prerequisites such as knowing the class first (cf. fetch_current_class). Usage is only implied by the name.

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