wm_status

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only behavior, side effects, or authorization needs. The term 'Status' suggests no mutations but is not explicit.

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 extremely short (3 words) but sacrifices necessary information for brevity. It does not earn its place because it lacks clarity and detail.

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 the large number of sibling status/metrics tools, the description is critically incomplete. It does not specify what type of world model status or metrics are returned, making it difficult for an AI agent to select 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?

No parameters exist, so the description could add meaning by explaining what 'World Model Status & Metrics' entails, but it fails to do so. The schema is empty, and the description provides no additional context beyond the name.

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?

Description states 'World Model Status & Metrics' but lacks specificity to distinguish from many sibling tools like get_metrics, get_platform_status, or get_snn_state. The verb 'Status' is implied rather than explicit.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_metrics or get_system_status. The description does not specify context or prerequisites.

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