arno.find

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

The readOnlyHint annotation is present and the description reinforces it by describing read-only source lookup. It adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations: exact-name matches win over substring matches, and source is returned in the same call. It does not mention no-match behavior or output truncation, but budget and continue parameters partially cover the truncation path.

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?

Three sentences with no waste. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by matching behavior and routing guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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 an 8-parameter tool, the description supplies the essential decision and invocation context: what it finds, what it returns, when to use it, and how to batch queries. The remaining parameter semantics are fully covered by the 100%-coverage schema, so no critical invocation detail is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the relationship between query and queries, exactly how multi-name lookup works, and the exact-vs-substring matching precedence. It leaves limit, budget, and maxLines semantics to the schema, which 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Locate declarations by name AND return their source in one call', which clearly differentiates it from read_range, grep, and outline. The fused search-and-read framing states exactly what the tool does, so an agent can select it without opening schemas.

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 gives explicit routing guidance: 'Use this instead of outline and read_range when you have not located the symbol yet.' It names alternatives, states the condition for choosing this tool, frames it as replacing grep searches, and explains how to batch several names with queries.

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