get_hover_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully covers behavioral traits: zero-based coordinates, prerequisite of load_project, and output format. No contradictions exist.

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 extremely concise with five sentences, each serving a purpose. It front-loads the core functionality and usage, with no redundant 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 low complexity and absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers usage, output, and prerequisite. It could mention error handling or behavior if no symbol found, but overall it is complete enough.

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% with descriptions already specifying zero-based coordinates. The description reinforces and clarifies the coordinate system, adding value by explicitly stating 'Uses ZERO-BASED coordinates.'

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 the tool retrieves hover information (documentation) for a symbol at a position. It distinguishes from siblings like get_javadoc and get_signature_help by specifying it returns signature, Javadoc, and quick info similar to IDE hover.

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 explicit usage guidance: position on any symbol, and notes the prerequisite 'Requires load_project to be called first.' It does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the context is clear.

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