nexus_edit_collection

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/destructive/idempotent hints. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations: ownership requirement, partial update semantics, and the exact JSON success shape or error string. It contradicts no annotation.

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 compact, front-loaded with purpose and ownership, then states the partial-update rule, then the return shape. No sentence is wasted.

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 7-param metadata edit, the description covers the prerequisite, mutation semantics, and return/error behavior. Combined with 100% schema coverage and annotations, an agent has enough to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema describes every parameter (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics by clarifying that omitted optional fields are unchanged, which is essential for correctly using the seven optional parameters. It leaves the null-clearing behavior slightly implicit, so not a 5.

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 states a specific verb ('Edit'), a clear resource ('collection's metadata'), and a concrete prerequisite ('must own the collection'). This distinguishes it from collection creation, deletion, listing, and revision tools in the sibling set.

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 clear usage context: editing metadata, requiring ownership, and the partial-update model ('Only the provided fields are changed; omitted fields stay as-is'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the usage is not merely implied.

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