reflens_neighbors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey all behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, requires permissions, or how it handles errors (e.g., target not found). Only the basic operation is described, leaving significant gaps.

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 consists of two sentences with no filler: the first defines the operation, the second states the use case. Every word serves a purpose, and it is appropriately short.

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?

Although the description outlines the three types of results (imports, importers, definitions), it lacks details on output format, pagination, error behavior, or how this tool interacts with other reflens tools. Given no output schema, more completeness is expected.

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 has 33% description coverage, with only 'target' described. The tool description repeats 'file or symbol' but adds no new meaning for 'repo' or 'limit' (default 50). For a low-coverage schema, the description fails to compensate by explaining parameters beyond the 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 expands the dependency graph around a file or symbol, specifying three aspects: what it imports, what imports it, and what it defines. This distinct verb-resource combination effectively differentiates it from sibling tools like reflens_list or reflens_search.

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 includes 'Use to follow relationships across the repo,' which implies a use case but does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or mention alternatives. Without exclusions or comparisons, guidance is only implied, not explicit.

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