Add World Model Scenarios

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no additional behavioral context, such as whether scenarios are appended, if duplicates are allowed, or any side effects. The description is minimal and does not go beyond what annotations already convey.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded, stating the core action without unnecessary verbiage. Every word earns its place.

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 tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema. The description plus schema is adequate for basic invocation, but it lacks contextual information about what constitutes a scenario or any constraints. It is minimally complete but does not go beyond the basics.

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%, with descriptions already provided for both 'world_model_id' and 'scenarios'. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail about the parameters, so the baseline of 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 clearly states the verb 'Add' and the resource 'scenarios to a world model', making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like lyzr_world_model_list_scenarios, lyzr_world_model_update_scenario, and lyzr_world_model_delete_scenario.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to add scenarios as opposed to test cases or personas. It lacks context about prerequisites like the existence of the world model or any exclusions.

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