nexo_local_asset_get
Retrieve a specific local asset by its unique asset ID. Returns the indexed asset's details.
Instructions
Return one indexed local asset by asset id.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| asset_id | Yes |
Retrieve a specific local asset by its unique asset ID. Returns the indexed asset's details.
Return one indexed local asset by asset id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| asset_id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; the description only states a return action without disclosing side effects, error behavior, or permission requirements. For a fetch operation, more transparency is needed.
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 with no extraneous words, front-loaded and efficient.
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 simple retrieval tool, the description covers the core operation but omits return format and error handling. Given no output schema or annotations, more context would improve completeness.
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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning by stating 'by asset id', clarifying the parameter's role. However, it does not explain asset id format or constraints.
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 returns one indexed local asset by asset id, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like nexo_local_asset_neighbors, leaving the agent to infer uniqueness.
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, no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. The agent receives no context for tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/wazionapps/nexo'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server