nexo_user_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions 'compute' and 'inspectable' but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only or has side effects, or any permissions needed. The description is insufficient for behavioral transparency.

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 that front-loads the purpose, making it concise. However, it sacrifices necessary details for brevity, missing parameter explanations and usage context. It is concise but not sufficiently informative.

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 absence of an output schema, no annotations, and a large set of sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the snapshot contains, how to interpret results, or when to use this tool over related ones, leaving the agent underinformed.

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%, meaning the input schema has no descriptions for `days` and `persist`. The tool description does not explain these parameters' role (e.g., what 'days' refers to or how 'persist' affects behavior), adding no semantic value beyond the schema structure.

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 uses specific verb 'compute' and resource 'user-state snapshot', and lists sources (trust, corrections, sentiment, hot context), clearly indicating the tool's function. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like nexo_user_state_history or nexo_user_state_stats, which might share similar purposes.

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 vs alternatives, such as nexo_user_state_history for historical data or other cognitive tools. The description lacks 'when to use' and 'when not to use' context, which is critical given the large set of sibling tools.

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