Get a @lichtblick/suite API symbol

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, and there is no output schema, so the description's statement that it returns the TypeScript declaration plus doc comments is genuinely useful behavioral context. However, it says nothing about failure behavior for an unknown or mis-cased symbol, which is the main operational unknown for a lookup 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?

A single front-loaded sentence: the return contract comes first and the illustrative examples follow. No filler, no restatement of the tool name, every clause earns its place.

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, the description carries the return-value burden and does so adequately by naming the declaration and doc comments. For a one-parameter read tool with a readOnly hint, the only real gap is the error/lookup-miss behavior.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents the single 'symbol' parameter, including case-insensitivity. The description still adds value by enumerating representative valid values (PanelExtensionContext, ExtensionContext, RenderState, SettingsTreeNode), which guides the agent in choosing the right input token.

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: it returns the TypeScript declaration and doc comments of a symbol exported by @lichtblick/suite. The concrete symbol examples make the scope unambiguous and distinguish it from a listing tool, though it never names the sibling extension_api_list as its complement (symbol discovery).

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no pointer to alternatives. An agent must infer that extension_api_list is the way to discover symbol names before calling this tool, and nothing states when not to use it (e.g. for general docs, where docs_fetch/docs_search apply).

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