get_signature_help

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

Describes the tool's behavior (returns overloads, highlights parameter) and mentions it uses LSP. Though no annotations are provided, the description adequately conveys the read-only nature and typical use, with no contradictions.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose and mechanism; the second provides a usage tip. Perfectly sized for the task.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is functional but incomplete. It lacks parameter details, return value format, and any mention of error conditions. Adequate for a simple LSP tool but with clear 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 coverage is 0% with no parameter descriptions. The description implies file_path, line, column but does not explicitly map or describe any of the 4 parameters, including the optional language_id. The description adds minimal value over the raw 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns function signature help at a location via LSP, specifying 'returns available overloads and highlights the active parameter'. It distinguishes usage context but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_completions.

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?

Explicitly advises 'Use this when the cursor is inside a function call's argument list', providing clear context. However, no when-not or alternative tools are mentioned, such as suggesting get_completions for general completions.

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