worldlabs_help

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

The description mentions three detail levels, providing some behavioral insight. However, with no annotations provided, it does not disclose traits such as read-only nature, permission requirements, or potential side effects.

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 concise, consisting of two short sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the primary purpose and details effectively.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and parameters. It mentions what the tool returns (documentation, models, workflow, context), which is sufficient for a help tool of moderate complexity.

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 schema already explains the parameters well. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond mentioning 'three detail levels', which is already in the schema. 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 clearly states that the tool returns structured documentation about every tool in the server, Marble API models, typical workflow, and World Labs context. It distinguishes itself from siblings which are operational tools (e.g., generate_world_from_image) by being a help/reference tool.

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 for retrieving documentation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks guidance on when not to use it or comparisons to other tools.

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