suggest_queries

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it is 'Read-only' (consistent with annotations) and specifies the JSON return structure. While it does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide, the return format detail adds useful context.

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?

Three sentences efficiently convey purpose, usage guidance, and return format. No redundant information. Front-loaded with the key purpose.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it (first exploration), and what it returns (JSON with topFiles, topSymbols, languageStats, exampleQueries). It also references a sibling tool for alternative use cases.

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?

There are no parameters (input schema empty), so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds value by explaining the output structure.

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 it is an onboarding helper that shows top imported files, PageRank symbols, language stats, and example tool calls. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_project_map by indicating that for a structured project map, that tool should be used instead.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this first when exploring an unfamiliar project' and provides an alternative tool (get_project_map) for a structured map. This gives clear guidance on when to use and when not to use this tool.

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