chimera_evolve

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the iterative process of selection and mutation and the return format. However, it does not mention side effects, determinism, or whether the operation is read-only.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with the main purpose: 'Fitness-ranked candidate selector.' Every sentence adds value.

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 description omits the 'action' parameter which has two modes (run/info). No output schema, so the return explanation is minimal. Lacks details on prerequisites, error conditions, or parameter interactions.

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 80% (4 of 5 parameters have descriptions). The description adds context about 'N generations' and 'mutation' but does not explain the 'action' parameter or the candidates structure beyond the schema.

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 clearly states it is a fitness-ranked candidate selector that runs evolutionary generations, distinguishing it from other chimera tools like chimera_score or chimera_optimize. The verb 'selects' and resource 'candidates' are specific.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like chimera_optimize or chimera_explore. The description implies it is for evolution but does not state exclusions or prerequisites.

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