chimera_mode

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns a tool subset, which is a safe read operation. No side effects or destructive actions are implied. However, it doesn't elaborate on the format or behavior beyond returning a list, so it's adequate but not rich.

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 consists of exactly two sentences, with the purpose front-loaded. Every word is informative, no fluff or repetition. It is highly concise and well-structured.

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 there is no output schema, the description could specify the return format (e.g., list of tool names) but it's not strictly necessary. The tool has only 2 parameters with defaults, and the description covers its purpose and usage context. It is largely complete for the simplicity of the 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% and the schema already provides good descriptions for both parameters (mode enum with explanations, task_description optional). The tool description adds the context of reducing token overhead but doesn't enhance individual parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, so baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('relevant tool subset for a task type'), clearly indicating what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being a mode selector that returns a subset of tools based on a task type.

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?

The description provides a clear reason to use the tool: 'to avoid unnecessary tool invocations and reduce token overhead.' While it lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives, the context of many sibling tools implies this is a routing tool, and the description gives sufficient usage guidance.

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