nexo_support_ticket_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states that it creates a ticket, without disclosing side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or that it writes to an external system.

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, which is short but lacks structure. It could be improved by front-loading key parameter details or usage context.

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 no output schema, 5 parameters, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, parameter meanings, or how it differs from other support ticket tools.

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 information about the 5 parameters (subject, message, priority, client_message_id, origin). No hints on allowed values, defaults, or formats.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'real NEXO support ticket', with specific scope 'for a product bug/setup issue'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nexo_support_ticket_close or nexo_support_ticket_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 implies usage when needing to create a support ticket for bugs or setup issues, but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or what alternatives exist (e.g., nexo_support_ticket_message for adding messages).

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