nexo_recent_context_capture

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the 24-hour window and event appending, but it omits crucial details: whether updating overwrites existing items, side effects of appending events, or any destructive aspects. The description partially informs but leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 succinct with two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the primary action, and the second provides usage guidance. No superfluous text; every word earns its place.

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 (13 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. It lacks information on return values, error handling, required prerequisites, and limitations. Important behavioral context is missing, leaving an agent without sufficient guidance for correct invocation.

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%, yet the description adds no explanation for any of the 13 parameters (e.g., title, summary, details). It only implies a '24h context item' and 'event' but does not clarify parameter roles, defaults, or constraints. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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's purpose: 'Capture/update a recent 24h context item and append an event.' It specifies the verb (capture/update) and resource (context item), making the action and scope understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'nexo_recent_context' or 'nexo_recent_context_resolve', which limits sibling distinction.

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 when to use it but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives. No exclusion criteria or comparisons to similar tools are given.

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