get_links

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

No annotations are present, and the description only states that it returns links with attributes. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as permissions, performance, or side effects. For a simple read operation, minimal transparency is provided.

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 concise with two sentences and an Args line. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no fluff.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and the attributes returned. It could explicitly state that the request is for a specific network_id, but overall it is complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It provides a brief but clear explanation of the single parameter 'network_id' as 'Session id of the network to inspect,' adding meaning beyond the schema's title.

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 it returns all links (pipes, pumps, valves) with their attributes. The verb 'Return' and the resource 'links' are specific, and it distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_nodes or get_controls.

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 alternatives. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context for its use.

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