doc_search_links_from

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 only mentions the plan restriction and fails to describe return format, input requirements, or error behavior. This is insufficient for a tool lacking annotation support.

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, concise sentence that communicates the core purpose and a key restriction (PRO+ plan). Every word earns its place, with no fluff or 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 empty schema, missing output schema, and lack of annotations, the description is materially incomplete. It fails to specify the required input parameter, return value, or edge cases, making it insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema is empty with additionalProperties true, so no parameters are defined. The description references 'a given doc/page' but does not explain how to specify it, leaving the expected input ambiguous. Since there are no schema parameters, the description should clarify the identifier but does not.

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 'Find links originating from a given doc/page' clearly states a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like doc_search_links_to (which finds incoming links) by the direction of links.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as doc_search_links_to or doc_search_unresolved. The only additional context is 'PRO+ plan', which is a prerequisite, not a usage guideline.

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