nexo_cognitive_inspect

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

With no annotations, the description adds some behavioral context (debug-only, no rehearsal), but lacks details on permissions, side effects, or return behavior.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. Efficiently communicates purpose and a key behavioral note.

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?

Tool is simple with two parameters, and the description clarifies its debug nature. However, lacking an output schema, it could mention what is returned (e.g., memory details).

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 100%, so the description does not need to add much. It confirms memory_id is an integer and store selects between 'stm' and 'ltm', which matches the schema.

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 'Inspect', the resource 'memory by ID', and the debugging purpose. It distinguishes from siblings by noting it does not trigger rehearsal.

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 it is a safe read operation for debugging since it does not trigger rehearsal, but it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like nexo_cognitive_retrieve or nexo_cognitive_stats.

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