nexo_skill_apply

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only notes that execution goes through the stable nexo scripts runtime, which provides some context, but it fails to explain side effects, required permissions, or what happens to the system state. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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 short (two sentences), which could be concise, but it sacrifices clarity and completeness. The structure is adequate but lacks front-loading of critical information like parameter usage or sibling differentiation.

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 complexity of the tool (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, many siblings), the description is far too brief. It does not cover parameter usage, expected outcomes, or how it relates to other similar tools, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 does not add any meaning to the parameters (id, params, mode, dry_run, context). It mentions modes but does not explain their significance or the syntax for the 'params' and 'context' fields. The agent must infer from parameter names alone, which is inadequate.

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 (apply a skill) and mentions three modes (guide, execute, hybrid) and the runtime. However, it does not distinguish this tool from many sibling skill tools like nexo_skill_approve or nexo_skill_compose, missing the specificity needed for tool selection.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other skill-related tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or scenarios where this tool should be avoided, leaving the agent without decision support.

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