nexo_recent_context_capture

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden. It mentions 'capture/update' and 'append an event' but does not disclose whether the operation is idempotent, what happens if a title already exists, any required permissions, or side effects. The behavioral traits are insufficiently described.

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 consists of two sentences, with the action front-loaded. It is reasonably concise, but could potentially incorporate more information without becoming verbose. No redundant or irrelevant content.

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 13 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It covers only the basic purpose and a usage hint, leaving out parameter details, return value, error scenarios, and behavioral nuances. The tool's complexity demands a much richer description.

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%, meaning the description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names. The description only implicitly references 'title' (required) but does not explain the purpose of the other 12 parameters (actor, owner, state, topic, details, summary, metadata, source_id, ttl_hours, session_id, context_key, source_type). This is a critical gap.

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 action: 'Capture/update a recent 24h context item and append an event.' The verb 'capture/update' combined with 'recent 24h context item' and 'append an event' distinguishes it from sibling tools like nexo_recent_context (likely read-only) and nexo_recent_context_resolve.

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 provides a usage context: 'Use this for important ongoing threads that should stay mentally fresh across sessions/clients.' This implies the tool is for maintaining continuity on significant topics. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools.

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