nexo_memory_health

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral details. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, if it has side effects, or any rate limits. The lack of behavioral context leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's impact.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's function. It is front-loaded and contains no superfluous words.

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 an output schema and no further context, the description is somewhat incomplete. It does not explain what 'health and table status' entails or what the return format looks like. For a monitoring tool, additional details about typical output would help.

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 zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the description cannot add parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4; the description adequately indicates the purpose without needing to elaborate on parameters.

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 ('Return') and the resource ('Memory Observations v2 health and table status'). It is specific and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like nexo_memory_search or nexo_status by focusing exclusively on health/status.

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 such as nexo_status or nexo_runtime_service_status. The description does not specify prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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