nexus_oauth_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations by explicitly stating that the access token itself is never exposed, only a prefix and expiry metadata, which is valuable security-relevant information.

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 with the core purpose, followed by a precise security note and a structured return summary. Every sentence contributes information without redundancy or 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?

Given zero parameters, a provided output schema, and annotations that fully cover the safety profile, the description is complete. It tells the agent what state is reported, confirms sensitive token data is not returned, and lists the JSON fields, so no essential context is 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description still adds value by clarifying what the reported state consists of, including configured env vars, token expiry, scope, and whether a refresh token exists, even though no parameter documentation is needed.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Report', with a clear resource, 'OAuth login state', and enumerates the exact fields returned. This makes it unambiguous and naturally distinguishes it from OAuth action siblings like nexus_oauth_login, nexus_oauth_refresh, and nexus_oauth_logout.

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 purpose implies when to use it — to inspect the current OAuth login state rather than to log in, log out, exchange, or refresh. However, it never explicitly states conditions, exclusions, or names alternatives, leaving the comparison to be inferred from sibling tool names.

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