nexo_auto_flush_recent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a read operation ('Show') and implies no side effects, but lacks details about authorization requirements, data ordering, pagination behavior, or the meaning of 'recent'. Adequate for a simple retrieval tool.

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, focused sentence with no fluff. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details such as how 'recent' is defined, sorting order, or the relationship to compaction. Could be more informative for an agent unfamiliar with the domain.

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 schema has two parameters (limit and session_id) with defaults, but the description does not add any meaning beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate, but it fails to explain the parameters' purpose or format, leaving the agent to infer from the parameter names alone.

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 the verb ('Show'), the resource ('structured auto-flush records'), and the context ('written before compaction'). It effectively distinguishes the tool from its sibling 'nexo_auto_flush_stats', which likely provides statistics rather than records.

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 implies the tool is for viewing recent auto-flush records obtained before compaction, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'nexo_auto_flush_stats'. No mention of prerequisites or scenarios to avoid.

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