nexo_cortex_quality

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

The term 'summarise' suggests a read-only aggregation, but no annotations are provided to confirm. The description does not disclose potential side effects, permissions, or output structure, leaving gaps in 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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads key functionality, though it could benefit from slight expansion for clarity.

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's purpose (aggregation) and low parameter count, the description lacks details on output format, definitions of metrics (e.g., 'linked outcome success'), and how the data is scoped beyond days.

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 sole parameter 'days' is not described in the description. With 0% schema description coverage, the agent must infer its meaning (likely time range) without any textual clarification.

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 it summarizes recommendation accept rate, override rate, and linked outcome success for Cortex evaluations. It distinguishes from sibling tools like nexo_cortex_stats or nexo_cortex_override by focusing on quality metrics, though it could be more precise.

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 versus alternatives like nexo_cortex_stats or nexo_cortex_review. The description implies aggregation but lacks explicit context for usage.

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