gd_lsp_hover

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states it returns documentation and type info but does not mention side effects (or lack thereof) like read-only nature, nor does it discuss error cases or limitations. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and purpose, no wasted words. Excellent conciseness.

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?

For a simple tool with three well-described parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. However, it does not specify the return format, though standard LSP hover responses might be assumed. Minor gap.

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 100% with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond restating 'specific line and character'. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already carries the burden.

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 simulates hovering over a symbol to get documentation and type info, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like gd_lsp_definition (which goes to definition) and gd_lsp_symbols (which lists symbols).

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?

The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or scenarios where it should not be used. The agent has no explicit cues for selection.

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