list_functions

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It states that the output includes signatures and line ranges, giving some insight into the result, but it does not detail the exact return structure, error behavior on invalid paths, or whether it includes nested vs top-level functions. The read-only nature is implied by the verb 'Lists' but not explicitly stated.

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, efficient sentence of 17 words that immediately states the action, scope, and output. No filler or redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It specifies the file type, the entities listed (functions and methods), and the output format at a high level (signatures and line ranges). The main missing piece is the exact JSON structure, but for a list tool this is reasonably inferred.

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 input schema covers 100% of the single parameter with a clear description ('Absolute path to the TS/JS file'). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'Lists' and identifies the resource as 'all functions and methods in a TypeScript/JavaScript file' with output details (signatures and line ranges). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_methods (which likely only covers methods) and list_declarations (which covers broader declarations).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_methods or list_declarations. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tool names are mentioned; the usage is only implied by the action statement.

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