magento_trace_call_chain

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses what types of calls are traced and that a call tree is returned. It does not mention limitations (e.g., dynamic calls) but is reasonably transparent for a static analysis tool.

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?

Two sentences, each adding value: first states purpose and scope, second details what is traced and return type. No wasted words, front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, inputs, and behavior. It lacks details on the output format (call tree structure), but for a simple tracing tool with 3 parameters, it is fairly complete.

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?

All three parameters are well-described in the schema with examples for className and methodName, and maxDepth has default and description. The description adds no additional param info, but schema coverage is 100%. Examples add value, so above baseline.

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 it traces the internal method call chain from a specific class::method, detailing types of calls followed (same class, DI, events). This distinguishes it from siblings like magento_find_callers or magento_trace_flow.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (tracing execution path from a method), but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it. It implicitly differentiates from sibling tools through specificity.

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