NEXO Brain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'show' which suggests a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify permissions, data format, pagination, or side effects. This is inadequate for a tool that likely returns sensitive review data, leaving significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 moderate complexity (involving review queues), no annotations, and an output schema that likely handles return values, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It lacks parameter explanations and behavioral details, though the output schema may mitigate some gaps in understanding the response format.

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 one parameter ('days') with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about parameters. This leaves the agent with no semantic understanding of what 'days' means or how it affects the output, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 'Show decisions and learnings that are due for review' clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('show') and resources ('decisions and learnings'), but it's somewhat vague about what 'due for review' means and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'nexo_decision_log' or 'nexo_learning_list' that might handle similar data.

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. The description implies it's for reviewing items, but it doesn't specify prerequisites, timing, or how it differs from other decision/learning-related tools in the sibling list, leaving the agent to guess based on context.

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