file_outline

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose a key behavioral trait: bodies are elided, so the output is a structural outline rather than full content. It does not mention output limits, token truncation, or depth semantics, but for a read-only outline tool the disclosed behavior is the most important part.

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 short sentences front-load the core purpose and immediately add usage context. There is no redundant or filler content; every sentence contributes to effective tool invocation.

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?

The description is sufficient for a basic call (path) and tells the agent why to use it, but it omits parameter semantics and does not define the output format beyond 'definitions, key paths or headings, bodies elided.' With no output schema or annotations, the description leaves moderate gaps in what an agent can expect and how to tune the call.

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 says nothing about max_depth, max_tokens, or include_docstrings. The parameter names and defaults are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not compensate for the schema's lack of textual explanation, leaving the agent to infer how these parameters affect the outline.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Outline one file') and specifies what the result contains: definitions, key paths or headings, with bodies elided. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like search_symbols or get_symbol, but the whole-file-overview scope makes its purpose clear.

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 gives a clear when-to-use directive: use this tool instead of reading a file to find out what is in it. It does not, however, name sibling alternatives or state when to choose them, so the guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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