Get Nexus

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that detection is local HTTP and that the JSON includes found, endpoint, and port, but it does not describe failure behavior, timeouts, or what happens when the gateway is absent.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and stays compact across four short sentences. The final sentence partially repeats return information that is already captured by the output schema, keeping it just below maximum conciseness.

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?

For a parameterless detection tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: local gateway detection, local HTTP, and returned fields. A brief note about failure or no-gateway behavior would make it fully complete.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain, which establishes a baseline of 4. The mention of backend=nexus applies to the sibling list_models tool, not to get_nexus itself.

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 uses a specific verb ('Detect') and resource ('Msty Nexus local gateway and its port'), and it clarifies that model names come from list_models with backend=nexus. It is clear enough to distinguish get_nexus from most siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with query_nexus.

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?

It gives one useful routing instruction: use list_models with backend=nexus for model names. However, it does not explicitly say when to call get_nexus versus alternatives like query_nexus, get_status, or get_msty_installation.

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