NEXUS AGI

Create entity with linking

create_entity_cognitive

Create a new entity and link it to specific existing entities in the same call.

Always inserts a new node (no name de-duplication). Like create_entity,
it records a creation episode, memory links and an event, and may queue
merge proposals for very similar names. If any explicit link targets an
unknown entity, nothing is created.

Args:
    name: Human-readable name.
    entity_type: Type from the closed ontology (schema enum).
    strategy: 'hybrid' (default) — root link plus explicit_links;
        'explicit' — only explicit_links (required);
        'root' — only the NEXUS root link;
        'similar' — related_to the most recent entity of the same type;
        'none' — no links.
    attributes: Optional key-value attributes.
    explicit_links: List of {entity_id, relation_type (ontology enum,
        default 'related_to'), weight, causal_probability, direction
        ('outgoing' default, or 'incoming')}.
    episode_description: Optional note stored on the creation episode.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`name`	Yes
`strategy`	No	hybrid
`attributes`	No
`entity_type`	Yes
`explicit_links`	No
`episode_description`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false), the description discloses rich behavior: always inserts a new node, records a creation episode/memory links/event, may queue merge proposals for similar names, and is atomic ('If any explicit link targets an unknown entity, nothing is created'). These are non-obvious side effects and transactional guarantees the agent could not derive from the structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose and key transactional caveat are front-loaded before the Args block, and every sentence carries information. The Args enumeration is slightly dense but earns its place given 0% schema coverage and nested objects.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 6-param tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers purpose, side effects, atomicity, and per-parameter semantics adequately. The only shortfall is unexplained meaning for weight/causal_probability, but nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden, and it largely succeeds: it enumerates all 6 params and spells out the strategy enum values ('hybrid'/'explicit'/'root'/'similar'/'none') with their exact wiring, plus the nested explicit_links fields (relation_type default 'related_to', direction default 'outgoing'). Minor gap: weight and causal_probability are named but not explained semantically.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: create a new entity AND link it to existing entities in one call. It explicitly distinguishes itself from create_entity by explaining shared side effects ('Like create_entity, it records a creation episode...') and adding the linking capability, so an agent can route correctly among create_entity, create_relation, and relate_entities.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It conveys the contextual split implied by 'link it to specific existing entities in the same call' and contrasts with de-duplicating behavior ('no name de-duplication'), which hints at when this differs from a merge/de-dup path. However, it never states explicit when-not conditions or names an alternative tool to use instead, leaving the choice between this and create_entity + create_relation to inference.

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

All NEXUS AGI tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?