neurogenesis__best_next_steps

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation ('routing recommendation'), but fails to explicitly state that it does not modify state, nor does it mention any side effects, safety concerns, or dependencies.

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 very short (two sentences), but the first bracketed sentence is dense and potentially confusing. While concise, it sacrifices clarity and structure.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the output looks like, how to interpret 'cognitive steps', or any limitations or edge cases.

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 description adds no meaning to the three parameters (agent_id, from_node, limit). Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but it does not mention any parameter.

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 it returns 'the strongest next cognitive steps from a given node', which clarifies the verb and resource. However, terms like 'cognitive steps' and the intro bracket are vague, and no distinction is made from siblings like route_task.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as route_task. The description lacks any context about when it is appropriate to call this function.

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