lsp_definition

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

The description mentions 'normalized locations' but does not explain what normalization means or disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, rate limits, or server dependencies. Since annotations are missing, the description should provide more context.

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 a single sentence, efficient and front-loaded with the verb and resource. It avoids unnecessary words, though it could be slightly improved by adding a brief usage note.

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 the complexity (nested position object, no output schema) and the rich sibling context, the description lacks critical information about the return format (e.g., list of locations) and what 'normalized' means. It is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 schema already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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 the LSP request type ('textDocument/definition') and the action (request from LSP server and return normalized locations). However, it does not differentiate from similar siblings like lsp_declaration or lsp_type_definition, which may confuse an agent.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools for symbol navigation, the description should specify that this is for finding the definition of a symbol, not its declaration or type definition.

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