explain_symbol

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the output format (LSP hover, function signature, doc comment, often Markdown) and implies a read-only lookup. It doesn't mention error behavior or side effects, but for a documentation lookup, this is adequate.

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 sentences front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a usage guideline and alternative. No fluff.

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 explains the tool's output in detail and provides usage context and an alternative tool. It lacks error-handling details (e.g., symbol not found), but for a lookup tool this is not critical. Overall complete for effective use.

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%, with clear descriptions for uri, line, and character. The description adds minimal extra parameter meaning, only referencing 'the given position' which maps to line/character. 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?

Clearly states it returns documentation and type information (LSP hover content) for a symbol at a position, with a specific verb and resource. Also differentiates from get_definition explicitly, so no confusion with siblings.

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 states when to use ('when you need to understand what a symbol is without navigating to its source') and provides an alternative for a related need ('For the file location of where the symbol is defined, use get_definition instead').

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