world_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It states this is a read operation ('Get'), which is correct. However, it does not disclose any side effects, required permissions, or rate limits. For a read-only tool with no annotations, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 that clearly states the function and enumerates what it retrieves. No redundant words or filler.

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 has no output schema, but the description lists nine key sections, giving a good sense of what the response contains. It does not describe response structure or pagination, which is acceptable given the complexity and sibling tool set.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with good descriptions for both parameters (platform with canonical/alias mapping, sections with enum list). The description adds value by listing the sections that can be filtered, reinforcing schema meaning.

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 uses the verb 'Get' and lists nine specific Warframe world state components (sortie, archon hunt, nightwave, etc.), providing a clear resource scope that distinguishes it from sibling tools like baro_kiteer or active_fissures, which target narrower domains.

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 implies this tool is for general world state queries, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus sibling tools like baro_kiteer (Baro Ki'Teer) or active_fissures (specific active missions). Users may not know if this tool overlaps with others.

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