list_declarations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is a read-only 'list' operation and clarifies the scope as 'package-level', but it does not describe the return format (e.g., array of names, objects with type) or any potential limitations (e.g., excluding declarations inside functions).

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 one concise sentence (13 words) that is front-loaded with the key verb 'Lists' and immediately specifies the resource and scope. No wasted words.

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 one parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the tool's purpose and scope but omits what the returned data looks like (e.g., list of names, declaration objects). This is a notable gap for an agent needing to interpret the result, though the tool's simplicity mitigates it.

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 defines the single parameter 'path' as 'Absolute path to the TS/JS file' with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter information, so it relies entirely on the schema, which is adequate, thus scoring the baseline 3.

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 lists package-level constant and variable declarations in a TypeScript/JavaScript file. It specifies the action (lists), resource (constant and variable declarations), and scope (package-level), distinguishing it from siblings like list_functions and list_methods.

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 makes the tool's purpose clear enough for an agent to infer when to use it (when needing top-level const/let/var declarations). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use list_functions for functions'.

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