Match JavaScript AST

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only 'Find' operation and specifies the Acorn parser, but does not disclose output shape, traversal behavior, failure modes, or how filters are applied. Too sparse for a tool with no safety annotations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose without filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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?

The description omits return format and important behavioral caveats (e.g., whether code is parsed statically, how matches are represented, maxResult behavior). Given no output schema and no annotations, this brevity leaves too much unsaid for a 4-parameter tool in a complex analysis domain.

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%, but the description adds meaning for two key parameters: 'Acorn node type' clarifies nodeType, and 'optional property filters' clarifies filter. Code and maxResults remain inferred from their names, which is acceptable, but not all parameters are explicitly explained.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find'), names the resource ('AST nodes'), and specifies the matching criteria ('Acorn node type and optional property filters'). This clearly differentiates from transformation tools like ast_transform_preview, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus sibling analysis tools like analysis_data_flow or ast_transform_preview. It lacks any explicit or implicit usage context, leaving the agent to infer applicability.

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