nexo_outcome_pattern_capture

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool creates a 'reusable artifact (currently a learning)', but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it modifies existing data, requires permissions, or is idempotent). The behavioral impact is underspecified.

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 redundant text. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it sacrifices informativeness for brevity. A few more words could significantly improve understanding without harming conciseness.

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 complexity (3 params, no output schema, no annotations) and the rich sibling environment, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return values, how to retrieve the captured artifact, or the exact condition 'once the evidence is consistent'. Missing critical context for an agent to use it effectively.

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%, and the description only mentions 'repeated outcome pattern' and 'evidence is consistent'. Parameters pattern_key (required), target (default 'learning'), and category (default 'outcomes') are unexplained. The agent cannot infer valid values or constraints beyond defaults.

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 specifies the verb 'capture' and resource 'repeated outcome pattern' as a reusable artifact ('learning'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like nexo_outcome_register (single outcome) and nexo_outcome_pattern_candidates (finding patterns). However, it could be more specific about what exactly 'capture' entails.

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?

The phrase 'once the evidence is consistent' implies a condition for use. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool, nor alternatives like nexo_learning_add or nexo_outcome_register. The context suggests it should be used after confirming repeated occurrence, but this could be clearer.

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