Find Implementations

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

The annotations indicate a safe, read-only operation, and the description aligns by describing a search/find action. It adds the behavioral trait that indexing is required, which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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 concise sentences front-load the main purpose and then provide a necessary prerequisite. Every sentence is informative and there is no fluff.

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 description covers the core functionality and the prerequisite. Given that an output schema exists, return values need no explanation. It could provide more detail on parameter usage, but it is adequate for a simple 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?

Schema description coverage is 60%, and the description does not add additional meaning or examples beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. For instance, it doesn't explain how the 'language' parameter filters patterns. The description provides no extra value for parameters.

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 finds classes, structs, or objects that implement a given interface/trait, listing specific language patterns. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like localnest_find_definition and localnest_find_callers.

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 explicitly mentions the prerequisite of indexing via localnest_index_project, providing clear context for when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for a straightforward tool.

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