nexus_create_draft

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly discloses that the operation creates a draft and will not overwrite existing drafts. However, it does not mention return values, error behavior, or side effects beyond creation, leaving moderate gaps.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the action, target types, location, and key safety behavior with no filler. 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?

The definition is sufficient for invoking the tool: required and conditional parameters are known, and the non-overwrite behavior is stated. However, there is no output schema and no description of what the tool returns or how success/failure is signaled, which leaves some uncertainty for an agent.

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 only 25%, but the one non-obvious parameter ('projeto') is adequately described in the schema. The description adds little for 'tipo', 'titulo', and 'conteudo', though these are largely self-explanatory and the prose echoes the enum values. This is adequate but does not fully compensate for the low coverage.

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 a specific action ('Cria um rascunho') on a clear resource ('draft de ideia, briefing ou proposta no Nexus'), and adds a distinguishing guarantee ('sem sobrescrever rascunhos existentes'). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like nexus_search, nexus_get_project, and nexus_list_recent.

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 intended use is clear: creating new drafts of idea, briefing, or proposal. The phrase 'sem sobrescrever rascunhos existentes' provides a meaningful condition/exclusion, though no alternative tool is named or explicit when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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