nexus_explore_step

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that 'the engine always drives traversal and returns a frontier of leaves,' which adds some context about the tool's behavior, but it lacks details on permissions, side effects, rate limits, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for a tool with four parameters.

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 concise and front-loaded, with two sentences that directly state the tool's function and some behavioral context. There is no wasted verbiage, though the technical terms could be clearer.

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 the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no annotations) and the presence of an output schema, the description is partially complete. It covers the basic action and some behavioral traits but lacks parameter explanations and usage guidelines, making it adequate but with clear gaps for effective agent use.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It does not explain what 'session_id', 'decisions', 'global_frontier_limit', or 'include_history_summary' mean or how to use them, failing to add meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema.

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 tool 'Apply exploration decisions to an existing NEXUS session and return the next frontier,' which provides a verb ('apply') and resource ('NEXUS session'), but it's vague about what 'exploration decisions' and 'frontier' mean. It distinguishes from some siblings by mentioning dfs_guided_explicit and dfs_guided_bulk, but these terms are not clearly defined, leaving the purpose somewhat ambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description mentions dfs_guided_explicit and dfs_guided_bulk modes, but it doesn't explain when to choose this tool over other exploration-related siblings like nexus_start_exploration or nexus_resume_exploration, offering no context for selection.

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