Full mod report (one call)

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, openWorld), so the description instead contributes the aggregation behavior and the default-hiding semantics for archived files and upload history. It stops short of noting pagination, response size, or cache-expiry details, but the added context is substantive.

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?

Three tight sentences with the value proposition front-loaded, then the routing guidance, then the default-scope caveat. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 6-parameter aggregation tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description adequately explains what is returned and the default scope. It could note that refresh interacts with cache or how large the grouped response may be, 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.

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema carries the parameter burden and baseline would be 3. The description adds meaning by clarifying that archived/old files are excluded unless explicitly requested, which gives operational context for include_old_files beyond the schema's own text.

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?

Names a specific deliverable ('ONE-CALL mod report') and enumerates its contents: metadata, published files grouped by category, recent changelogs, page URL. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the three sibling tools it replaces, so an agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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?

'Prefer this over chaining nexus_get_mod + nexus_get_mod_files + nexus_get_mod_changelogs' gives an explicit when-to-use and names the exact alternatives. It also states the default scoping ('Archived/old files and upload history are hidden unless you ask'), telling the agent when the default view is insufficient.

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