List Document Backlinks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool scans all docs, which could be slow, and the specific meaning of backlinks (parent/references). However, it does not disclose return format, authentication requirements, or whether it is read-only.

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 two sentences: the first clearly states purpose, the second adds a behavioral note. No unnecessary words or information. Well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

For a simple list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys purpose and a performance warning. However, it lacks details about return format (list of doc IDs or objects) and the necessity of workspaceId, leaving some gaps for an AI agent.

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 50% (only docId has a description). The tool description does not add any parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides; it mentions 'a given doc' but does not explain workspaceId or its optionality/requiredness.

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 action 'Find' and the resource 'documents that embed-link to a given doc'. It specifies that it finds parent/references in the sidebar, distinguishing it from other listing tools like list_docs or search_docs.

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 provides a performance caveat ('may be slow on large workspaces') implying caution but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or when not to use it. No alternative tools are mentioned.

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