Get Flutter Source Map [Pro]

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It describes the output format (list of {widget, file, line, column} entries) but does not mention performance, pagination, or any side effects. This is adequate but minimal.

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 two sentences. The first sentence states the mapping function and output structure, while the second emphasizes its utility. It is front-loaded and without fluff.

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 no output schema and zero parameters, the description is reasonably complete, explaining what the tool returns. However, lacking annotations, it could briefly mention any prerequisites (e.g., needing a Flutter connection) or limitations (e.g., only works in debug mode).

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 tool has zero parameters and high schema coverage (100%), so the description's role is minimal. It adds value by explaining the return structure, which helps an agent understand the output without needing further elaboration.

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 maps every user-created widget to its source code location (file:line:column). While it is specific and action-oriented, it could slightly improve by differentiating from siblings like flutter_get_widget_details or flutter_get_widget_tree.

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 mentions it is 'the key tool for connecting what you see on screen to where it is in code,' implying a debugging or development context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., flutter_get_widget_details) or when not to use it.

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