nexo_cognitive_trigger_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only implies a creation operation without stating persistence, side effects, permissions, or return values. The agent receives minimal insight beyond the obvious.

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, well-structured sentence with an illustrative example. No wasted words; maximally concise while conveying core purpose.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description lacks completeness: no mention of return values (e.g., trigger ID), interaction with other trigger tools, or persistence behavior. Given no output schema, the description should provide more context for agent decision-making.

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 parameters are already documented. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. It restates the pattern/action concept but does not enrich parameter semantics.

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 tool creates a prospective memory trigger with an illustrative example ('when X is mentioned, remind about Y'). It uses specific verbs and resource naming, distinguishing it from sibling trigger management tools (check, delete, list, preview, rearm).

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 guidelines are provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like nexo_reminder_create or nexo_followup_create. The description lacks contextual context and exclusion criteria, relying solely on the name and brief purpose.

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