nexus_track_mod

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

The description adds valuable behavioral detail by explaining the idempotent behavior via HTTP status codes (200 already tracking, 201 newly tracked). This goes beyond the annotations, which only declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. It doesn't contradict annotations and adds context about the operation's effect.

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 concise sentences: the first states the action and purpose, the second outlines the return format. There is no wasted language, and the purpose is front-loaded.

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 tool with two well-documented parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and return values. It is complete given the annotations and schema.

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 schema provides thorough descriptions for both parameters (mod_id and domain_name), including an example format and a warning about not using display names. Since schema coverage is 100%, the tool description doesn't need to add extra parameter detail. 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 the specific verb 'track' and resource 'mod' for the authenticated account, and clarifies the action is for getting update notifications. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like nexus_get_tracked_mods (list tracking) and nexus_untrack_mod (stop tracking).

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 implies the usage context (starting notification tracking) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like nexus_untrack_mod or nexus_get_tracked_mods. The intent is clear, though a brief mention of related tools would strengthen it.

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