zen_links

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states it returns anchors, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness or disclose potential side effects. The 'crawler primitive' hint suggests safety, but more explicit behavioral traits (e.g., does not navigate, no state changes) would improve 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 very concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the action. However, it could restructure to include parameter explanations without becoming verbose. The current brevity lacks essential details, so conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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 no output schema and two undocumented parameters, the description is incomplete. It provides no return format details (e.g., array structure), error conditions, or behavior for empty results. The usage hint is present, but crucial invocation context is missing.

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%, yet the description completely ignores both parameters ('internal_only' and 'tab_id'). An agent cannot infer what 'internal_only' filters or which tab 'tab_id' targets. This is a critical gap that severely hampers correct invocation.

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 'Return every anchor with href + text', specifying the verb (return) and resource (anchors with href and text). It also provides context 'Useful as a crawler primitive', distinguishing it from siblings like zen_html (full HTML) and zen_dom (DOM structure).

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 hints at usage with 'Useful as a crawler primitive', but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool compared to alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer from the sibling list.

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