nexo_drive_act

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a state change (mark as investigated) but does not mention side effects, reversibility, permissions, or consequences. The context of being called by NEXO is noted but not fully transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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 simplicity of the tool and presence of sibling drive tools, the description is fairly complete. It could be improved by adding expected outcome values or prerequisites, but it adequately covers the core function.

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 schema already describes both parameters. The description adds minimal context (e.g., 'Signal ID that was investigated'), but does not specify valid values or constraints for the outcome string, leaving interpretation open.

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 action: 'Mark a drive signal as investigated with an outcome.' It identifies the resource (drive signal) and the verb (mark with outcome), distinguishing it from siblings like nexo_drive_dismiss and nexo_drive_reinforce.

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 specifies when to call the tool: 'after NEXO has autonomously investigated a READY signal.' This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use.

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