trace_callers

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states what the tool shows (callers, importers, parent components) and gives examples. It does not mention read-only nature, side effects, or auth requirements, but the examples imply a safe analytical tool.

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: first defines the action, second provides usage examples. No redundancy, perfectly front-loaded.

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 output schema, the description covers purpose and usage well. Schema covers all parameters. It could mention output format or pagination, but the examples and sibling context make it adequate.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add significant parameter details beyond the schema. It mentions 'incoming edges' which relates to edge_kinds but not specifically.

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 clearly states 'Trace what depends on a function/component (incoming edges)' and gives specific use-case examples. It distinguishes from sibling trace_callees (outgoing edges) implicitly.

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?

Description explicitly says 'Use this to answer: ...' for two common scenarios. It doesn't mention when not to use or alternative tools, but the context is clear enough.

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