nexo_skill_match

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool finds skills, but does not mention whether it is read-only, has side effects, requires permissions, or what response format to expect. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 exceptionally concise with only two sentences. The first sentence immediately states the primary purpose ('Find skills matching a task description'), and the second provides a usage hint. Every word is earned, and there is no redundancy. The structure is front-loaded and efficient.

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 two parameters (one optional) and no output schema, the description should provide more context about what 'skills' are, how matching works, and what the output contains. The hint about multi-step tasks is helpful but incomplete. For an agent to effectively use this tool, it needs details on results format, error conditions, or typical usage patterns.

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?

The input schema has two parameters (task, level) with no descriptions in the schema (0% coverage). The description does not explain either parameter's meaning or usage, especially the optional 'level' parameter. It fails to add any value beyond the schema, leaving the agent without guidance on how to use the parameters effectively.

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 finds skills matching a task description, with a specific verb 'Find' and resource 'skills'. It distinguishes itself by suggesting a use case ('Call before multi-step tasks'), which hints at its role among many sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from closely related tools like nexo_skill_get or nexo_skill_list.

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 advises calling the tool before multi-step tasks, providing a clear usage context. However, it lacks guidance on when not to use it, prerequisites, or alternatives such as nexo_skill_apply or nexo_skill_compose. No exclusions or comparisons are given.

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