Java References

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

Description lacks behavioral details such as permissions, rate limits, or side effects. The phrase 'summary-only' hints at reduced output but is vague. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and is insufficient.

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 sentence without superfluous words. However, it is too brief given the tool's complexity.

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 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to provide adequate context. Return value, parameter roles, and usage scenarios 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%, and the description adds no meaning to the 11 parameters. Only the concept of 'precise position' (file, line, column) is implied; other parameters like projectId, repoRoot, module, etc., remain unexplained.

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?

Description clearly states 'Return summary-only references for a precise Java symbol position', identifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like java_symbol by focusing on references, though it does not explicitly contrast with java_diagnostics or java_impact.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., java_symbol for symbol details, java_diagnostics for issues). No exclusions or prerequisites provided.

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