nexo_protocol_debt_resolve

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Resolve', which is ambiguous about side effects (e.g., destructive or irreversible). No information about what happens to resolved records or any required permissions. The precondition gives some context but insufficient transparency for a mutation tool.

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 sacrifices informativeness; it could be expanded to cover parameters or behavior without becoming overly long.

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 has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain how to use each parameter, what the resolution entails, or what the tool returns. The agent would be left with many unknowns.

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 6 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'by id or filters' but does not map to any specific parameter (debt_ids, debt_types, etc.). No meaning is added beyond the schema, leaving the agent unable to correctly populate 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 tool resolves protocol debt records, using a specific verb and resource. It mentions resolution by id or filters, and distinguishes from the sibling tool nexo_protocol_debt_list which lists debts. However, the phrase 'by id or filters' is somewhat vague.

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 description includes a precondition ('once the debt has been audited and cleared'), implying when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as nexo_protocol_debt_list for inspection.

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