nexo_opportunity_suppress

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

The description implies a mutating action ('suppress'), but does not disclose behavioral traits such as reversibility, side effects, or whether the suppression is permanent or temporary. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, which it fails to meet.

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, which is concise. However, it is under-specified and could benefit from more structure. It is not verbose, but its brevity comes at the cost of clarity.

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?

With no output schema, 4 parameters, and no annotations, the description does not cover basic contextual needs like what the tool returns, error conditions, or the overall effect. It is incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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 the description must compensate. It only adds 'by scope' which loosely relates to scope_type and scope_key, but provides no meaning for 'reason' or 'expires_at'. The description adds minimal value beyond parameter names.

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 the verb 'Suppress' and the resource 'opportunity suggestions', with the qualifier 'by scope'. This clearly indicates the tool's purpose but does not differentiate it from sibling tools like nexo_opportunity_feedback or nexo_opportunity_refresh.

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_opportunity_feedback or nexo_opportunity_refresh. The description lacks context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or when suppression is appropriate.

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