nexus_get_mod

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating the response is a JSON mod info object and that it is server-cached for 5 minutes, which helps set expectations about freshness. No contradiction with 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 front-loaded with its core purpose and uses a separate Returns section for response details. It is compact and informative, though the first sentence's field list overlaps somewhat with the example fields listed in the Returns section.

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 low parameter count, high schema coverage, presence of an output schema, and strong annotations, the description provides the additional context an agent needs: return shape, example fields, and caching behavior. Nothing essential appears 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 description coverage is 100%; both parameters already include clear explanations and examples (e.g., domain_name examples, mod_id example). The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action and resource: 'Get full details for one mod' and enumerates the included fields (name, author, version, description, endorsement/download counts, upload dates). It is clear and unambiguous, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling nexus_get_mod_v2.

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 when to use this tool: when you need full details for a single mod rather than a list or search result. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or provide exclusion criteria, leaving some routing judgment to the agent.

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