find_symbol

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden. It reveals that 'symbol' supports regex, which is a behavioral trait. However, it omits details like whether the search is recursive, whether it is read-only, or what happens if no match is found.

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 concise with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the core purpose and then lists parameters with brief explanations. Every sentence adds value.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but signaled), the description can omit return format details. It covers purpose and parameters adequately, though it could mention search depth (recursive) or case sensitivity to be fully comprehensive.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'symbol' supports regex and 'extensions' is comma-separated, adding meaning beyond the schema. The 'directory' parameter could be more explicit (e.g., 'path to the root directory for the search').

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 verb (search), the resource (symbol definition), and the scope (C/C++ files). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'list_functions' which lists functions rather than searching for arbitrary symbol definitions.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, there is no comparison with 'list_functions' or conditions like 'use this when you need a specific symbol location, use list_functions for an overview of all functions'.

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