chimera_typecheck

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It states the tool is non-executing and validates certain rules, but lacks details on return values, error handling, side effects, or required permissions. The description adds moderate value beyond the name.

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?

A single sentence conveys the tool's core function and key differentiators without any wasted words. The structure is front-loaded with the main action ('Static type-check') immediately.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose. However, it does not explicitly mention what the tool returns (e.g., error messages or success indicators), which would improve completeness. Slightly lacking for full contextual completeness.

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?

The schema description coverage for the single parameter 'source' is 100%, so the schema already explains what it is. The tool description does not add additional semantics about the parameter's format, expected length, or examples, making it minimally sufficient but not enhanced.

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 performs static type-checking on a ChimeraLang program without execution. It specifies validation of confidence boundaries and scope rules, distinguishing it from execution-focused tools like chimera_run and verification tools like chimera_verify.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description implies it should be used before execution, but does not mention alternatives or contexts where other sibling tools (e.g., chimera_safety_check, chimera_verify) would be more appropriate.

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