get_method_by_name

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It only states 'fetch source code', implying a read operation, but fails to disclose error behavior (e.g., if method not found), side effects, or performance implications.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words. However, it is slightly under-informative; extra context could be added without harming conciseness.

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?

For a tool with 2 parameters and many siblings, the description is too sparse. It does not mention output format (though output schema exists), error cases, or how it differs from similar tools like 'get_class_source'.

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%, and the description does not explain the parameters beyond their names. While 'class_name' and 'method_name' are self-explanatory, the description adds no meaning or constraints (e.g., format, existence).

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 the tool retrieves source code of a method from a specific class, specifying verb 'fetch', resource 'source code', and context 'from a specific class'. It differentiates from siblings like 'get_methods_of_class' (lists methods) and 'search_method_by_name' (searches across classes).

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?

No guidelines on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_class_source' for entire class, 'search_method_by_name' for searching). No prerequisites or context for usage are provided.

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