react-profiler-component-source

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

Discloses key behaviors: returns found:false for node_modules components, handles multiple matches with otherMatches[], returns 50 lines of source and memoization status. No destructive actions mentioned; for a read tool this is sufficient.

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?

Only two sentences, front-loaded with primary function and output, then usage instruction and edge cases. Every sentence adds value; no waste.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description thoroughly covers return values (file path, line number, memoization, 50 lines of source, found status, otherMatches). Also explains the not-found case and ambiguity handling.

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%, and description adds context like component_name for lookup and project_root for file system. Also explains how parameters are used in the context of multiple matches.

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 uses a specific verb 'Find' and resource 'React component's source', listing exact return fields. It distinguishes itself from siblings like debugger-component-tree by stating its specific role in the profiling workflow.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this per-finding after react-profiler-analyze to inspect source before proposing a fix.' Provides clear context but no explicit exclusion of alternatives.

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