describe_symbol

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Report', implying a read operation, but does not disclose behavior for missing symbols, scope limitations, or side effects. Minimal behavioral context beyond the verb itself.

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 that is direct and front-loaded. Every word contributes to the meaning with no redundancy or filler. Ideal 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema (which defines return values), the description is mostly sufficient. Minor gaps remain, such as error handling for unknown symbols, but these are not critical for a basic describe operation.

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 has 0% description coverage for the single 'name' parameter. The description does not explicitly explain what 'name' refers to, though the tool name and context infer it means the symbol's name. No added semantic value beyond the schema's bare type declaration.

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 uses specific verb 'Report' and identifies the resource 'one symbol' plus the precise output scope ('type and dimensions'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_symbols (which lists many) and get_matrix (which retrieves data).

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 inspecting a single symbol, contrasting with list_symbols for enumerating symbols. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and does not mention alternatives or prerequisites.

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