nexus_get_updated_mods

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations by disclosing that results are server-cached for 5 minutes and specifying the returned timestamp fields.

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: a one-sentence purpose, followed by a tight return-type block, cache note, and use case. Every sentence earns its place with no 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 low-complexity read-only endpoint with full schema documentation, annotations, and an output schema, the description supplies the missing behavioral context: caching, epoch timestamps, and a concrete use case. An agent has everything needed 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%: both period and domain_name have detailed descriptions including format, example, and enum values. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond restating the concept of a game and time window, so baseline 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: get all mods for a specific game whose files or activity changed within a given time window. It clearly identifies the resource (mods), the game scope via domain_name, and the time-window filter, which distinguishes it from generic latest/trending endpoints.

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 provides a clear intended use case ('Useful to check if your own mod page saw activity') and scopes the call by game and period. It does not name sibling alternatives or explicitly say when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.

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