nexo_heartbeat

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behaviors: updates session task, checks inbox/pending questions, auto-detects trust events, may surface silent signals (DIARY_OVERDUE, GUARD_REMINDER, etc.), and output always begins with a NOW_UTC line. No contradictions.

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?

Well-structured and front-loaded with summary and usage instruction. Composed of a few sentences without redundancy, though the parameter documentation could be slightly more 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 tool's complexity, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, when to call, side effects, output format (NOW_UTC), and parameter details. Nothing critical is missing.

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 description must provide full parameter meaning. It does so clearly: sid as session ID from nexo_startup, task as brief 5-10 word description, context_hint as last 2-3 sentences for sentiment detection and trust auto-scoring, with advice to always provide for best results.

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 states a specific verb-resource combination: 'Update session task, check inbox and pending questions. Auto-detects trust events.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on other operations like reconciliation, memory, or workflow.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call at the START of every user interaction before doing work, and notes that silent runtime signals must be treated as internal obligations. Lacks explicit instructions on when not to use or alternatives, but the mandatory nature is clear.

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