magento_find_di_wiring

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool extracts DI configuration and constructor signatures, but does not mention potential behaviors such as error handling for missing classes, performance implications, or any destructive actions. The description is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 consists of two efficient sentences. The first sentence lists all retrieved information in a structured bullet-like manner, and the second sentence summarizes the use case. There is no redundant or unnecessary content.

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 a single parameter and no output schema, the description covers the tool's functionality well by listing all return elements. However, it does not describe the structure or format of the output, which could leave the agent uncertain about what to expect. Still, it is generally complete for a tool of this complexity.

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?

The schema coverage is 100%, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds value by providing concrete examples of valid class name formats (e.g., full or short names) and clarifying that it accepts interfaces. This extra context improves usability beyond the schema alone.

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 tool retrieves the complete DI wiring for a PHP class, listing specific components like preferences, plugins, constructor arguments, virtual types, and argument overrides. This distinct purpose is explicitly differentiated from sibling tools such as magento_find_plugin and magento_find_preference.

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 includes the explicit guidance 'Use this to understand how a class is configured and extended across all modules,' which clearly indicates when to use the tool. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context among sibling tools makes the usage scope clear.

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