wm_status

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

The description provides no behavioral information. With no annotations, the burden is on the description to disclose traits like read-only, side effects, or return structure. Nothing is conveyed, so transparency is nonexistent.

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 very short but incomplete as a sentence. It lacks a verb and reads more like a title. While concise, it sacrifices clarity by not being a full imperative statement. Could be improved with minimal addition like 'Get world model status and metrics.'

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is still insufficient. It does not explain what metrics are included or what 'status' entails. The agent lacks context to understand the tool's output or value.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning, but since there are no parameters, no additional information is needed.

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 'World Model Status & Metrics' is essentially a noun phrase that restates the tool name without a verb indicating action. It lacks specificity on what the tool does (e.g., retrieve, get), making it vague and not distinguishing it from similar sibling tools like get_system_status or get_metrics.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or context. This leaves the agent without direction for selection.

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