nexo_recall

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, side effects, permissions, rate limits, or query limitations. As a search tool, it is likely safe, but this is not stated.

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 two sentences: the first states purpose and scope, the second provides usage guidance. No redundant words, efficiently structured for quick understanding.

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?

While purpose and usage are clear, the description lacks information about return format, pagination, or any behavioral constraints. For a tool with no output schema, this omission reduces completeness. However, it adequately covers the core functionality.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions covering 100%. The description adds value by specifying the memory types searched (changes, decisions, etc.), which enriches the meaning of the 'query' parameter beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'ALL NEXO memory', listing specific categories. It mentions an alternative for older history (diary_archive), but does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling 'nexo_memory_recall', so clarity is high but not perfect.

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 implies use for recent/general memory and suggests diary_archive for older context, providing some guidance. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions, and does not mention other potential alternatives.

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