nexo_goal_list

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

No annotations provided. The description implies a read-only list operation but doesn't confirm safety, pagination, or performance characteristics. It fails to disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic list action.

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, short sentence. While concise, it sacrifices crucial detail. It is front-loaded but lacks structure to convey parameter or usage information.

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?

For a list tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what fields are returned, how to filter effectively, or pagination behavior. Sibling tools like nexo_goal_get provide more context for comparison.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameter meanings. It does not mention any of the three parameters (status, include_closed, limit), leaving the agent with only the parameter names and default values for guidance.

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 ('List') and the resource ('durable goals'), with a purpose ('so active, blocked, and abandoned objectives stay visible'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like nexo_goal_get (single goal) and nexo_goal_update (update), but could be more specific about what 'durable' means.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like nexo_goal_profile_list or nexo_goal_engine_status. The phrase about visibility hints at monitoring, but lacks direct instructions or exclusion criteria.

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