gp_recall

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses pre-indexed nature, no false positives, sub-millisecond performance, and path resolution behavior. Does not cover error handling (e.g., symbol not found), but overall good context.

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?

Highly concise and front-loaded: starts with purpose, then guidelines, then parameter hints. Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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?

With no output schema, the description specifies return values (kind, file:line, signature). All 4 parameters are explained. Sibling tools are listed. Complete for the intended use.

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 100% (baseline 3). The description adds meaning by explaining substring usage ('Pass substring:true for partial-name searches') and path resolution behavior, going beyond the simple schema descriptions.

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 it finds a symbol definition by name, returning kind, file:line, and signature. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly stating to use instead of grep and not for 'who calls X?' (use gp_callers).

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?

Provides explicit when to use ('ALWAYS use instead of grep -rn...') and when not to use ('Do NOT use for "who calls X?" — use gp_callers for that'), along with hints for substring parameter usage.

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