World

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Manage' and does not disclose that remove_room, remove_thing, and remove_exit are destructive, whether changes persist, or what convert does to the existing world model. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation 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 compact and front-loaded, stating scope first, then usage conditions, then an exclusion with a concrete alternative. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 gives solid selection guidance and the schema handles per-parameter semantics, but with no annotations and no output schema, the tool-level behavior is incomplete. An agent still lacks information about return values, error conditions, persistence, and the semantics of the convert action beyond a vague 'bulk-converting' reference.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents every parameter and its applicable action(s). The description adds no param-level meaning beyond grouping parameters conceptually by rooms, things, and exits, 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 specifies a clear resource (the world model) and explicit actions (creating, updating, removing, or bulk-converting rooms, things, and exits). It distinguishes itself from the navigation-focused sibling command tool by explicitly naming what it is not for.

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?

Provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Do NOT use when' guidance. It names the alternative tool and sub-actions (command action: execute / resolve), so an agent knows exactly when to route elsewhere.

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