get_enclosing_element

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

Without annotations, the description discloses important behavioral traits: zero-based coordinates and the prerequisite. It adds value beyond the schema by summarizing the output, but it does not describe behavior for invalid inputs or potential errors.

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 four lines, each serving a purpose: stating the action, usage, output, coordinate warning, and prerequisite. No extraneous 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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description covers purpose, output summary, coordinate system, and prerequisite. However, it does not address edge cases or error conditions, nor does it guide the agent on when to prefer this tool over similar siblings.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with each parameter already describing zero-based coordinates. The description reiterates the zero-based nature but adds no new semantic information 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 'Get the enclosing element at a position' and specifies output as 'method, type, and package info', providing a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings like 'get_method_at_position' by focusing on the enclosing element rather than just the method.

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 gives clear usage context: 'Position anywhere in code' and explicitly states a prerequisite ('Requires load_project to be called first'). It does not, however, provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_method_at_position.

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