nexo_local_asset_neighbors

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

With no annotations and a minimal description, the tool's behavioral traits are undisclosed. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or requires authentication. The description only says 'Return', implying read-only, but this is not explicit.

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 concise at one sentence, but it lacks structure and front-loads no critical information. It earns its place but is too brief to be truly helpful.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what the returned graph relations look like, their format, or any constraints (e.g., max limit). The agent is left guessing about the tool's full behavior.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no information about the two parameters (asset_id, limit). The agent receives no additional meaning beyond the schema's basic types and default, making it hard to use correctly.

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 tool returns 'graph relations around one indexed local asset,' using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not elaborate on what 'graph relations' entails, which could be ambiguous, and it fails to distinguish from siblings like nexo_entity_dossier or nexo_local_asset_get.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., nexo_evidence_search, nexo_local_asset_get). The description lacks context for appropriate usage, such as specifying that it is for graph traversal or neighbor discovery.

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