codeCompletion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without detailing permissions, rate limits, response format, or side effects. For a tool with 4 required parameters and no output schema, this lack of information is inadequate.

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 is a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action, though it lacks necessary detail, making it concise but under-specified.

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 required parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema, and sibling tools like 'codeCompletionElement' and 'codeCompletionFull', the description is incomplete. It does not provide enough context for an agent to understand how to use the tool effectively.

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%, meaning parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no information about what 'sourceUrl', 'source', 'line', or 'column' mean or how they should be used, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 'Get code completion suggestions' restates the tool name 'codeCompletion' with minimal elaboration, making it tautological. It specifies the action ('Get') and resource ('code completion suggestions') but lacks detail about scope or differentiation from sibling tools like 'codeCompletionElement' and 'codeCompletionFull', leaving the purpose vague.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, and fails to differentiate from sibling tools such as 'codeCompletionElement' and 'codeCompletionFull', offering no usage instructions.

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