outline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does this well by stating read-only status, explaining the important distinction between 'not indexed' and 'defines nothing,' and specifying the exact response format: one line per definition with name and line number.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, alternative tool, parameter requirement, read-only flag, edge-case behavior, and output format. The purpose is front-loaded, and the length is justified because there are no annotations to offload behavioral information to.

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?

For a one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, this description is complete. It covers how to invoke the tool, what it returns, how to interpret the two plain-text outcomes, and which sibling to use for a different need. No critical operational detail is 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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents the single path parameter as 'Repository-relative path, exactly as the index stores it.' The description only repeats the repository-relative aspect without adding new syntax, validation, or format details, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action: it lists what one file declares in line order, giving the file's shape without reading the whole file. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the where_used sibling, so an agent can tell them apart immediately.

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?

It gives explicit routing guidance: 'Use where_used instead to find every caller of one symbol.' This tells the agent when not to use outline and which sibling to choose instead. The intended use case—inspecting a file's declared shape—is clear from the first sentence.

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