nexus_get_age_verification_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the return shape (JSON with verified and externalVerificationIds), which is useful context, though it does not discuss auth, errors, or rate limits.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a compact return format. The 'v2 GraphQL' note is slightly extra but not distracting, and every sentence serves a clear purpose.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, a rich output schema, and safety annotations, the description is nearly complete. It could be improved by explicitly naming the related verification flow tools, but this is a minor gap rather than a critical omission.

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 single parameter user_id is fully documented in the schema with 'User ID. Omit for the current user.', providing 100% schema description coverage. The description itself adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Get') and resource ('a user's age verification status'), which clearly identifies the tool's function. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like nexus_start_age_verification_flow because it reads rather than initiates a flow.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving age verification status, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it. The differentiation from the start/appeal flow tools is left to inference from the tool names and the 'Get' wording.

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