Extract bounded symbol evidence from one repository file using the configured structural symbol adapter, providing reliable code symbols without fabricated claims.
Use the operator-configured structural symbol adapter for one repository file; returns bounded symbol evidence only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| timeout | No | ||
| language | No | ||
| file_path | Yes | ||
| repo_path | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the remaining burden is operational detail. The description adds only 'returns bounded symbol evidence only' — an unexplained size qualifier with no statement of what 'bounded' means (truncation? caps? pagination?) and no mention of the configured adapter's failure modes or language support.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is appropriate for a simple lookup tool. It is efficient, though it spends its few words on jargon rather than the concrete facts an agent needs.
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 and 0% parameter coverage, the description must carry the full load, and it doesn't. It omits what symbols are returned, the meaning of 'bounded', and the semantics of all four parameters — significant gaps for a tool with this much undocumented structure.
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 all four properties carry no descriptive text, so the description is the only place semantics could be supplied. It says nothing about repo_path, file_path, language, or timeout, leaving every parameter undocumented in both places.
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?
States a verb+resource ('structural symbol adapter') and a scope ('one repository file'), which is better than a tautology. But 'operator-configured structural symbol adapter' is jargon that doesn't concretely say what the tool extracts (symbols like functions/classes), and the description never distinguishes it from the sibling 'find_symbol' or 'map_find_symbol', which plausibly do the same job. An agent cannot route confidently between them from this text.
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 when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use, and no mention of alternatives. The sibling list contains at least three symbol-related tools (find_symbol, map_find_symbol, lsp_symbols) and the description gives nothing to choose between them, leaving selection entirely to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.