nexo_adaptive_mode

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It implies computation from signals but does not disclose if it is read-only, destructive, or requires special permissions. No mention of side effects, rate limits, or output format.

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?

Single sentence of 13 words is efficient and front-loaded with key information (function, resource, values). However, some brevity comes at the cost of missing details, but it remains appropriately concise for a brief description.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 6 parameters, the description is too brief. It does not explain the return value, how to interpret the computed mode, or any examples. The tool's complexity demands more context for correct invocation.

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%, and the description adds no meaning to the 6 parameters. It only mentions '6 signals' without mapping to the specific parameters (vibe, intensity, corrections, etc.) or explaining their semantics. This fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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?

Description clearly states the tool gets or computes an adaptive personality mode with specific values (FLOW/NORMAL/TENSION) from 6 signals. It is specific about verb and resource but does not differentiate from sibling tools like nexo_adaptive_decay or nexo_adaptive_history.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Lacks context about prerequisites, suitable scenarios, or exclusions. The description only states functionality without usage direction.

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