type_hierarchy

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

No annotations provided. Description explains direction parameter behavior and default, but no other behavioral details like side effects, prerequisites, or performance.

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, no redundant words, front-loaded with the main action. Highly efficient.

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, but description at least mentions return types (supertypes/subtypes). Lacks error scenarios or prerequisites. Adequate but not thorough for a simple tool.

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% and description only explains 'direction' parameter. Does not clarify 'file_path', 'language_id', 'line', 'column', which are typical for positional tools but still undocumented.

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 verb 'Show' and resource 'type hierarchy', differentiating from sibling 'call_hierarchy' by specifying inheritance relationships.

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 states use case: 'use this to understand class and interface inheritance relationships.' Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives but context is clear.

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