chimera_overhead_audit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the estimation purpose and benefit, but does not cover behavioral traits such as accuracy, performance impact, or whether the estimate is real-time or cached. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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: first defines the tool's action and inputs, second explains the value proposition. Highly concise, front-loaded, and 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 covers purpose, inputs, and motivation but lacks information about the output format or return value. No output schema exists, so the description should hint at what the estimate looks like. Adequate but incomplete.

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 67% (two of three parameters have descriptions). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; system_prompt lacks a schema description but the tool description implies its role. Baseline 3 with no extra semantic detail.

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 estimates per-turn baseline cost from specific sources (system prompt, tool definitions, MCP servers). Uses specific verb 'estimate' and resource 'per-turn baseline cost', and distinguishes from siblings by focusing on overhead/ghost tokens.

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 implies usage when wanting to understand and reduce overhead costs, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives like chimera_cost_estimate or chimera_cost_track. No exclusions or conditional use cases provided.

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