find_implementations

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

No annotations provided; description adequately discloses zero-based coordinates and requirement for prior project loading. Could add more about error handling or behavior when not on a type, but sufficient.

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?

Very concise with clear labeled sections (USAGE, OUTPUT, IMPORTANT). No unnecessary words; every sentence provides essential information.

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?

Covers key aspects: what it does, prerequisites, output type, and coordinate system. No output schema, but output described. Could mention empty result case, but not critical for functionality.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds value by emphasizing zero-based coordinates for line and column, and mentioning default for maxResults (100).

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 finds implementations of interfaces or extensions of classes. Distinguishes from siblings like find_references and get_type_hierarchy by specifying the scope (implementors/subclasses) and usage position on type.

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 prerequisite (load_project) and usage context (position on a type). Does not mention when to avoid this tool versus alternatives, but the purpose is specific enough.

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