lsp_document_symbol

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does add a useful behavioral caveat: 'Confidence: MEDIUM. Symbols generated by macros may be missing.' However, it does not disclose preconditions such as requiring LSP initialization or an open file, nor explicitly confirm the read-only nature beyond the verb 'Show.'

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?

Two short sentences plus a bolded confidence note. The main action is front-loaded, the IDE analogy is useful, and every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple and the output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description gives purpose and a limitation, but omits usage guidance, parameter semantics, and preconditions like initialization or file-open requirements, leaving noticeable gaps for an agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It only ties file_path to 'the file's' outline, adding minimal meaning; it does not explain path format, whether the file must be open, or how file_path relates to other LSP state.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Show the file's symbol outline (functions, variables, macros).' It clearly distinguishes itself from lsp_workspace_symbol by scoping to a single file, so an agent can tell which tool to use without inspecting schemas.

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 analogy to an IDE Outline/Structure panel gives a clear implied use case, but the description never explicitly says when to use this tool versus alternatives like lsp_workspace_symbol, nor does it state any exclusions or preconditions.

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