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 important behavioral traits: zero-based coordinates and the prerequisite to call load_project. However, it does not mention potential side effects or whether results are limited to maxResults, which is inferred from the parameter.

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 with sections (USAGE, OUTPUT, IMPORTANT) and avoids repetition. It is front-loaded with the purpose and key details, though the formatting could be more structured.

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 the complexity of a symbol reference tool and no output schema, the description adequately covers prerequisites, coordinate system, and basic usage. It is reasonably complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters, but the description adds value by emphasizing the 'ZERO-BASED coordinates' for line and column, and implying a default of 100 for maxResults. This clarifies the parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 'Find all references to a symbol across the project' with a specific verb (find) and resource (references). Among sibling tools like find_implementations and find_method_references, this tool is distinguished as the generic reference finder.

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 includes a prerequisite ('Requires load_project to be called first') and a usage hint ('Position on symbol, find all usages'), but does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool versus siblings like find_method_references or find_implementations.

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