get_outline

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does disclose the core behavioral trait: a lightweight, non-whole-file read that saves tokens and returns structural elements with line numbers. However, it says nothing about error behavior on unsupported file types, permissions, or size limits.

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, front-loaded with the action and return shape, then the value proposition. The parenthetical enumeration is compact and informative rather than padding.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the tool is simple (one required parameter). The description covers purpose, contents, and the token-saving rationale; only parameter semantics and explicit usage routing are 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 0% for both parameters, and the description never mentions 'path' or 'workspace_dir'. With zero coverage the description should compensate but adds no meaning for either parameter or their required/default status.

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 specific verb and resource ('Returns a lightweight file skeleton') and enumerates the concrete contents (classes, methods, functions, headers, line numbers). No sibling tool overlaps with file outlining, so the agent can place it immediately without opening the schema.

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 clause 'without reading the whole file. Saves ~90% of tokens' implies the intended use case (cheap structural reconnaissance before/ instead of a full read), but no alternative tool is named and no when-not condition is given. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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