nexo_skill_compose

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only or mutates state, if original skills are preserved, authorization needs, or any side effects.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and contains no filler. However, it may be too terse for a tool with 8 parameters, but it earns points for being concise with no wasted words.

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 8 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the purpose of most parameters, expected return values, or behavior beyond a vague overview.

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 only hints at component_ids as 'multiple existing skills' without explaining the other 6 parameters (new_id, name, level, mode, tags, trigger_patterns). The agent cannot infer correct values for most parameters from the description alone.

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 composes multiple existing skills into one higher-level skill, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from related tools like nexo_skill_create (create from scratch) and nexo_skill_merge (merge), though 'compose' vs 'merge' could be more explicitly contrasted.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., nexo_skill_merge, nexo_skill_create). No context on prerequisites, suitable scenarios, or when not to use it.

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