wm_train_step

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

The description provides no behavioral details such as side effects, state mutations, or required permissions. Without annotations, the description should compensate but it is entirely opaque, leaving the agent unaware of what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 brief at one sentence, but it sacrifices essential detail. It is under-specified rather than efficiently concise, failing to earn its place by omitting crucial information.

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?

Despite 100% schema coverage, the description lacks context about output, side effects, or how the training step affects the system. For a tool with a nested object parameter and no output schema, this is completely inadequate.

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 coverage is 100% with the 'action' parameter described in the schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Online World Model Training Step' is essentially a restatement of the tool's name and provides no specific action or resource. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like wm_encode or wm_plan, leaving the agent unclear on what the tool actually accomplishes.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned, forcing the agent to guess based on the name alone.

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