nexus_get_opted_in_mods

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only a 'v2 GraphQL' note and the returned JSON shape; with an output schema present, these add limited behavioral context beyond what structured fields already provide.

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 and front-loaded: it states the purpose in the first sentence and then gives the return shape. Every sentence contributes useful information, and there is no redundant filler.

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, one-parameter tool with a rich output schema and strong annotations, the description is complete. It correctly identifies the resource, the user scope, and the return structure; nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the single parameter account_id is documented as 'Account ID.' The description does not add additional semantic detail about the parameter beyond reinforcing that it refers to the user whose mods are being listed.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List a user's mods that opted into Donation Points (v2 GraphQL).' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling list-type tools like nexus_get_tracked_mods or nexus_get_favourite_games by the unique DP-opt-in qualifier.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: when you need the DP-opted-in mods for a user. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives or state exclusions, but the intended use is unambiguous given the precise resource description.

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