nexus_draft

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

Given no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that output follows 'formato y candados obligatorios de MODULE-DRAFT' and degrades to L3-NV if notification date is uncertain. This is good but could specify more about side effects or authentication needs.

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 a single focused paragraph in Spanish, conveying purpose, behavior, and usage context without redundancy. It could be more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is efficient.

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?

With 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should cover return format and error handling. It mentions cost and degradation but not what the tool returns (presumably generated text). This gap reduces completeness.

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 coverage is 50%, meaning half of parameters lack descriptions. The description does not elaborate on parameter meanings beyond what the schema provides. It briefly mentions 'instructions' but doesn't compensate for under-documented parameters.

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 clearly states it generates a first draft of a legal document (recurso, demanda, etc.) following mandatory format. It specifies the resource (legal brief) and action (drafting), and distinguishes from sibling tools that are analytical or search-based.

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 explicitly says 'USAR CUANDO: el usuario pide redactar un escrito concreto' (use when user requests a specific document). It also notes typical context (after analysis) and degradation behavior. However, it lacks explicit contraindications or when to avoid.

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