nexus_search_by_md5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the return shape (JSON array of mod and file_details), but it does not disclose edge cases such as no-match behavior or rate limits. The added context is useful but modest.

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 two sentences with no filler: the first states the lookup action and use case, the second states the return format. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 two-parameter read-only lookup tool, the description plus fully documented schema and rich annotations are sufficient. The agent knows what the tool does, how to fill required parameters, and what shape the result takes via the output schema. No critical information 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%: both md5_hash and domain_name already have clear descriptions including constraints and examples. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, 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 clearly states the action ('Look up which mod and file on Nexus matches a file's MD5 hash') and the resource (Nexus mod/file by MD5). It is specific enough to be understood, but it does not explicitly differentiate from nearby siblings such as nexus_get_file_hash or nexus_get_file_hashes.

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 parenthetical '(useful to identify an installed file)' gives a clear intended use case. It does not name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it falls short of explicit when/when-not guidance but still provides clear context.

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