lsp_subtypes

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. The LSP call is typically read-only, but not stated.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the action verb 'Find' and includes the protocol mapping.

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?

No output schema or return value format described. Lacks prerequisites (e.g., need lsp_prepare_type_hierarchy). For a tool with no annotations, the description is incomplete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds minimal context beyond the schema (e.g., maps to typeHierarchy/subtypes), but does not significantly enhance understanding of parameters.

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?

Description clearly states it finds subclasses, implementers, child interfaces, or subtypes, and maps to the LSP typeHierarchy/subtypes request. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like lsp_supertypes.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention that a prior call to lsp_prepare_type_hierarchy is required, though the parameter description for itemId hints at it. No exclusions or comparisons with siblings like lsp_implementation or lsp_references.

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