nexus_search_games

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/destructive annotations, the description discloses a meaningful behavioral trait: the v2 GraphQL API does NOT consume the v1 REST rate-limit quota. It also documents the exact return shape and positions this tool as a search complement to the full catalog, adding substantial context beyond the 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 compact and front-loaded: purpose first, then a single high-value behavioral distinction, then the return contract. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant restating of schema fields.

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?

The schema documents all parameters, annotations cover the safety profile, and the description supplies the return schema plus a rate-limit relevant detail. For a read-only search tool with all-optional parameters, nothing needed to invoke it correctly 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%, so the parameters are already fully documented in the input schema. The description's 'by name' phrase loosely maps to the term parameter, but it adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides for sort, count, offset, or direction.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Search Nexus Mods games by name, sorted and paginated'. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling nexus_get_games by calling it a complement and labeling that sibling as the full cached catalog, so an agent can tell them apart immediately.

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 names the relevant alternative, nexus_get_games, and implies the usage boundary by contrasting a name-search with the full cached catalog. It does not explicitly state 'use this when you need name search' but the context is clear enough to route an agent correctly.

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