nexo_skill_promote

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the promotion is reversible, requires permissions, or has side effects. The agent has no insight into the tool's operational impact beyond the vague outcome.

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 a single sentence, making it concise. However, it sacrifices informativeness; it is appropriately sized but lacks necessary detail to be fully useful.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and three parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain parameter purposes, return values, prerequisites, or provide examples, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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 three parameters with zero description coverage. The description mentions 'published/stable lifecycle stage' but does not clarify which parameter (likely target_level) controls this, nor does it explain the meaning of id or reason. The description adds minimal value over the schema.

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 identifies the action (promote) and resource (skill) and indicates the outcome (moving to a stronger published/stable lifecycle stage). It is specific enough to distinguish from general skill creation or application tools, though 'stronger' is somewhat vague.

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 siblings like nexo_skill_approve or nexo_cognitive_quarantine_promote. The description lacks context for appropriate usage, leaving the agent to infer the intended scenarios.

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