chimera_glyph_directive

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

Without annotations, the description conveys the tool's effect (forces CG output) and output nature (directive string). Clearly states the directive must be injected as a system message. No contradictions; transparency is good though not exhaustive.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Structure efficiently guides usage and links to sibling tool.

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 no output schema, description adequately explains output as a directive and its injection point. Could slightly benefit from noting immediate use but is sufficiently complete for a directive-generation tool.

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%, baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining the default and effect of 'style' parameter, and clarifies 'task_hint' is appended. However, much of this is redundant with schema descriptions.

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 the tool emits a system instruction forcing AI to write in Chimera Glyph, specifying the directive's role and distinguishing it from chimera_glyph_translate which handles translation.

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?

Explicitly instructs the agent to inject the returned directive as a system message and explains the subsequent workflow: AI produces CG output, then translation via sibling tool. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios but provides sufficient context.

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