nexus_memory_search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so safety is already established. The description adds no further behavioral context beyond the search dimensions, such as return format or pagination behavior, and does not contradict annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and key parameters.

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 simple tool, strong annotations, and schema covering most parameters, the description is adequate. It lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling nexus_search, and does not describe return values, but these are non-critical for a straightforward read-only search.

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 75%, with descriptions for tags, text, and namespace, but not for limit. The description repeats the three filter modes but adds no extra semantics beyond the schema, and does not mention limit. It provides some value but relies largely on schema.

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 'Recall' and a clear resource 'memories', and specifies the search dimensions (text query, tags, or namespace). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nexus_search (generic search) and nexus_memory_write (write operation).

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 clearly implies use for recalling memories via text, tags, or namespace, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, such as when to use nexus_search instead.

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