get_symbol_context

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It mentions return content (definition, range, file context, docs) but fails to disclose whether the operation is read-only, what happens on missing symbols, or any prerequisites. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation safety net.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists key return components. No extraneous words; every phrase adds value. Ideal brevity for a simple tool.

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 single parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's return value. However, the presence of closely related sibling tools suggests that additional contextual completeness (e.g., 'use this when you need a broad overview vs. specific detail') would enhance usefulness.

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 sole parameter 'query' is fully described in the schema as 'The name of the symbol.' The description adds no additional meaning or formatting guidance. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3; the description does not improve or degrade parameter understanding.

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 retrieves comprehensive context of a symbol, listing included items (definition, range, file context, documentation). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_definition' or 'explain_symbol', which could confuse an AI agent on when to use this tool over others.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. Given many similar sibling tools (e.g., get_definition, explain_symbol, get_implementations), the lack of usage context leaves the agent without clear decision criteria.

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