nexus-mcp

Latest from a Nexus tracker

nexus_tracker

Read weekly synthesis reports from trackers monitoring PRC activity, organized crime, corruption, and fraud.

Instructions

The latest weekly synthesis from one of The Nexus's standing trackers: china-watch (PRC-linked activity), underground (organized crime / illicit economy), graft (public corruption), grift (consumer fraud & scams). Source: The Nexus.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "nexus_tracker"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Which tracker to read

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 20, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the tool returns a 'weekly synthesis', but omits details on authentication, rate limits, data freshness, or potential errors. Minimal transparency beyond the basic function.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, consisting of two sentences that efficiently convey the tool's purpose and the available trackers. No unnecessary words or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity with a single parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and the options. However, it could mention the output format or that it returns text, but overall it is sufficient for its purpose.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already describes the parameter 'name' with an enum and a brief description. The tool description adds significant value by explaining what each tracker covers (e.g., 'china-watch (PRC-linked activity)'), which exceeds the schema's minimal description and aids correct selection.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the latest weekly synthesis from one of four named Nexus trackers, specifying the verb 'get' and the resource 'weekly synthesis'. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like nexus_factcheck, nexus_record_lookup, or nexus_search, though their names suggest different functions.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It neither states prerequisites nor gives examples of appropriate use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and description.

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

Deploy Server