nexo_cortex_decide

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions persisting a recommendation 'on top of' the Cortex, but does not clarify if this is additive or overwriting, nor does it discuss permissions, side effects, or reversibility.

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 one sentence, making it concise, but at the expense of necessary detail. It is front-loaded but omits critical information about parameters and usage, so it is under-specified.

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 tool has 14 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to describe return values, parameter semantics, or behavioral traits, leaving the agent without sufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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 does not explain any of the 14 parameters, including the two required ones (goal, alternatives). The agent has no guidance on how to fill parameters beyond their names.

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 evaluates 2+ alternatives for a high-impact task and persists the recommendation to the Cortex. It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes from sibling tools like nexo_cortex_review or nexo_decision_log.

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 usage when there are multiple alternatives to evaluate, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. No exclusions or context are given, so the guidance is minimal.

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