lsp_initialize

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the effect (provides project root for import resolution) and the override behavior of langserver_path. It does not address idempotency or behavior after shutdown, which is a minor gap.

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?

Concise, well-structured intro, lifecycle note, and Args block. Every sentence earns its place, and key information is front-loaded.

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?

Output schema exists so return values are covered. All parameters are explained and the ordering requirement is stated. Minor edge cases like path format or re-initialization behavior are not addressed.

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 fully compensates. It explains root_dir as the project root directory and langserver_path with detailed override semantics (overrides env vars/project config, useful for switching builds).

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+resource: 'Initialize the scheme-langserver connection.' It also adds that it must be called before any other LSP tool, which clearly distinguishes it from all sibling tools and establishes its unique role.

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 'Must be called before any other LSP tool,' giving a clear when-to-use directive. It doesn't mention when not to use (e.g., if already initialized) or differentiate from lsp_restart, so it's not fully complete.

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