find_implementations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains the hop limit but has a slight contradiction between 'directly implement' and 'via IMPLEMENTS' hops, leaving ambiguity about transitive results. No permissions or performance mentioned.

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 short, structured with Args and Returns, and contains no fluff. However, the 'directly' vs 'hops' wording could be clarified.

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 tool simplicity (one parameter) and presence of an output schema, the description covers the main use case and return format. It lacks detail on hop behavior and error cases, but is sufficient for a query tool.

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 description adds the parameter format and example ('interface_fqn: FQN of the interface, e.g. com.example.WalletService'), compensating for the 0% schema coverage. This adds meaning beyond the schema's simple type declaration.

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 'Find all classes that directly implement the given interface' with a specific verb and resource, along with the hop limit. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'find_superclasses' which does the reverse.

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 implies usage for finding implementing classes but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. The hop limit provides some context.

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