nexo_goal_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It only states it 'reads' and optionally includes runs, but it does not disclose any side effects, permissions required, behavior on missing goal, or rate limits. The agent lacks crucial information about safety or requirements.

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 that efficiently conveys the core functionality. Every word adds value, and no extraneous information is present. It is front-loaded and concise.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description should explain what the returned data contains or at least hint at the structure. It only mentions reading a goal and optionally including runs, but does not describe what a goal is, whether runs are included as part of the response, or any return format. Incomplete for a tool with only two parameters and no schema descriptions.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to the 'include_runs' parameter by stating it includes linked workflow runs. However, it does not explain the 'goal_id' parameter beyond being the identifier. Partial coverage but incomplete.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Read' and the resource 'durable goal', making the action unambiguous. It also mentions the optional inclusion of linked workflow runs. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from siblings like nexo_goal_list or nexo_goal_open, which have similar names. Missing a clear differentiation.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not explain that this tool is for reading a single goal by ID, while nexo_goal_list might be for listing all goals. No usage context or exclusions are given.

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