lean_file_outline

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 that the tool is 'Slow-ish' and returns 'Markdown formatted outline or error msg', which adds behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state the operation is read-only or describe any side effects, though the name implies a read.

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?

The description is compact and well-structured with clear Args and Returns sections. Each sentence adds value: the purpose, the token-efficiency note, the speed warning, and the input/output spec. No waste.

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 simple single-parameter tool, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, what input it takes, and what output to expect. The return type is explicitly stated as Markdown formatted outline or error msg, so no output schema detail is needed.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates by documenting 'file_path (str): Abs path to Lean file' in its Args section. This adds the critical requirement of an absolute path, which is not present in the schema. The baseline for 0 coverage is 4, and the description meets it.

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 a specific action: 'Get a concise outline' of imports and declarations with type signatures, covering theorems, defs, classes, and structures. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like lean_file_contents by emphasizing 'concise' and 'outline'.

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 phrase 'Highly useful and token-efficient' implies this is for when you want a quick overview rather than full file contents, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The 'Slow-ish' warning is a usage consideration but not a clear guideline.

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