Java Symbol

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It describes two modes but does not explain how the tool decides which mode to use (e.g., mutual exclusivity of parameters), what the output looks like, or error handling. The behavior around multiple parameter combinations is opaque.

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 that front-loads the main use cases, with no wasted words. However, given the complexity of 8 parameters and dual modes, it could be slightly longer to add necessary detail without losing conciseness.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and siblings indicating a development tool, the description is too brief. It does not explain the dual-operation mode, parameter relationships, prerequisites (e.g., open workspace), or what the tool returns. The description is insufficient for correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'query' (search) and for 'file', 'line', 'column' (position inspection), but does not explain 'projectId', 'repoRoot', 'limit', or 'semanticTimeoutMs'. Only 3 of 8 parameters are partially clarified.

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 two use cases: searching workspace symbols by query and inspecting hover/definition/implementation at a file position. The verb 'search' and 'inspect' with resource 'workspace symbols' and 'hover/definition/implementation' are specific, and the tool is well-distinguished from siblings like java_diagnostics or java_references.

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 implies usage for symbol-related tasks but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use the query mode vs the position inspection mode, nor does it mention when not to use or alternatives. The context is clear but lacks explicit directions.

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