find_references

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the zero-based coordinate system and the load_project dependency, but lacks details on auth requirements, rate limits, side effects, or output behavior beyond 'list of reference locations with context'. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise: four short sentences covering purpose, usage, output, important note, and prerequisite. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or filler.

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 covers purpose, coordinate system, prerequisite, and output type, but lacks detail on the output schema (e.g., fields in each reference location). Without an output schema, the description should provide more structure, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

All four parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description's value is limited. It reiterates zero-based coordinates, which the schema already states. No additional parameter semantics are provided, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 it finds all references to a symbol across the project, with usage hint 'Position on symbol, find all usages'. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like find_method_references, the generic name and description imply it covers any symbol, making it distinct enough.

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 description provides a prerequisite ('Requires load_project to be called first') and a usage hint ('Position on symbol, find all usages'). It does not specify when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to understand basic invocation conditions.

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