implementation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It does not disclose whether it returns direct or all descendants, works across files, or any limitations. The existence of an output schema is noted but its content is unknown, leaving behavioral gaps.

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, dense sentence that front-loads the core action. No extraneous words; every part is necessary.

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 zero annotations, no parameter descriptions, and no usage guidance, the description is incomplete for a tool likely requiring nuances (e.g., scope of search, return format). The output schema exists but is not described, leaving agents without full context.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the tool description adds no parameter context beyond names. However, the parameter names (file_path, line, character) are self-explanatory for a location-based tool, so it does not detract significantly. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does not fully compensate.

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 'Find implementations of an interface or abstract method', specifying the verb 'Find', the resource 'implementations', and the context (interface or abstract method). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'definition' (go to declaration) and 'type_definition' (type definition).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'references' or 'definition'. The use case is implied but not elaborated, and there are no when-not-to-use hints or prerequisites mentioned.

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