nexo_context_router

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 only states the output type ('compact local context evidence') but discloses no behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions required, or how evidence is selected. Minimal transparency.

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 sentence of 9 words, which is extremely terse. While brevity is good, it omits necessary detail for a tool with 5 parameters and many siblings, making it insufficiently informative.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description fails to explain what 'local context evidence' entails, how it differs from other context tools, or any constraints. The tool's complexity (5 params, many siblings) requires a richer description.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 5 parameters (limit, query, intent, max_chars, current_context), the description adds zero information about any parameter. An AI agent cannot infer parameter usage from the description 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 states it returns 'compact local context evidence suitable for injection before a reply', which gives a clear verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like nexo_local_context, nexo_context_packet, or nexo_recent_context, which likely serve similar purposes.

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 vs alternatives. Lacks any context for selection, no when-not-to-use, and no mention of prerequisites or scenarios.

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