chimerax_python_inspect

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Inspect' suggests a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, what side effects it may have, or what kind of response it returns. The description is too minimal to provide meaningful transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately concise, though the extreme brevity leaves little room for needed details; still, this dimension is about efficiency, which it handles well.

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 three parameters, zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and sibling tools that need differentiation, the one-line description is insufficient. It does not explain the optional parameters, return behavior, or how it compares to related tools, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke it correctly.

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 must compensate. It adds some meaning by indicating that 'symbol' refers to a ChimeraX Python API symbol, but it does not explain the other two parameters ('include_dir', 'max_doc_chars') at all. This leaves significant gaps in parameter understanding.

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 'Inspect a live ChimeraX Python API symbol' uses a specific verb ('inspect') and identifies the resource ('live ChimeraX Python API symbol'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like chimerax_api_read or chimerax_python_dir by emphasizing 'live' runtime inspection.

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 word 'live' implies this tool is intended for inspecting a runtime symbol in the active ChimeraX session, offering some usage context. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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