nexo_tool_explain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, has side effects, requires authentication, or what the output format is. The agent lacks essential safety and response expectations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently conveys the core functionality without redundancy.

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 output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about what the explanation includes (e.g., description, input schema, usage examples) and what 'live' implies. The current text is too sparse for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior and response.

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 coverage is 0% for the single 'name' parameter. The description implies 'name' refers to the tool or capability identifier in the catalog, adding some meaning beyond the raw schema. However, it does not explain constraints (e.g., exact spelling, case sensitivity, required format), so compensation is partial.

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 specifies a clear verb ('Explain') and resource ('a live NEXO tool/capability from the generated system catalog'), distinguishing it from sibling action-oriented tools like nexo_goal_get or nexo_workflow_open. It effectively communicates the tool's meta-catalog purpose.

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?

Usage is implied: call this tool when the agent needs to understand another tool. However, there are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, nor any mention of alternatives among the many sibling tools. The guidance is minimal.

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