list_symbols

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

No annotations are provided. The description states it lists symbols and returns JSON but does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, side effects, or permissions. Basic functionality is clear but lacks extra transparency.

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 is a single sentence followed by argument explanations and return format. It is concise, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no nested objects, has output schema), the description is complete. It explains inputs and return format adequately.

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%, but the description adds meaning by explaining that project_path is the root directory and file_path is relative. This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'List all top-level symbols in a Python file', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like move_symbol and rename_symbol.

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 arguments and return but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. Usage is implied but no explicit when-not or alternative guidance.

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