expand_links

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention if the tool is read-only, modifies state, requires permissions, or has rate limits. The brief description only states the action without any context on side effects or constraints.

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 short (one sentence), which is concise but overly sparse. It lacks structure and fails to provide essential information like what the output looks like or how parameters interact. The brevity sacrifices clarity.

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 tool has two parameters, no annotations, and an output schema not described, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the output format, how 'context' is used, or what types of related links are returned. An agent would lack sufficient information to use the tool effectively.

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 lacks parameter descriptions. The tool description does not clarify the meaning of 'query' or 'context' beyond their names. For example, it does not explain what 'context' does or how it affects the expanded links.

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 states it expands a query with related links for discovery. While the verb 'expand' is slightly ambiguous, the phrase 'related links for discovery' indicates the tool returns links rather than modifying the query. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_web (general search results) and valyu_answer (answers).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like search_web, extract_content, and valyu_answer have different purposes, but the description does not help an agent choose between them. There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use indications.

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