chimera_world_model

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only mentions 'confidence-weighted' but does not specify permissions, side effects (e.g., persistence, atomicity), or behavior on invalid keys. This is insufficient for a stateful tool.

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 is extremely concise (one sentence), which is efficient but lacks necessary detail. It front-loads the key action types but omits structure like parameter explanations or context. It is not overly verbose but sacrifices completeness.

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 the tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should be more complete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or usage patterns, leaving an agent with insufficient information to correctly select and invoke 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning. The terms 'update' and 'query' are mentioned but not linked to the action parameter, and key, value, confidence, namespace are undefined. The schema provides types and defaults, but the description fails to clarify their semantics.

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 states it is a 'confid ence-weighted key-value world state' and lists two actions ('update, query'), giving a clear verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like chimera_memory or chimera_self_model, which might also involve state.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or context such as whether updates are reversible or if queries are fast. The description is purely functional.

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