ghl_get_trigger_links

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of disclosing behavior. 'Get all' indicates a read-only operation, which is transparent. However, it does not mention whether results are paginated, ordered, or limited, which could be relevant for a list tool. Overall, it covers the basic behavior but lacks depth.

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, front-loaded sentence: 'Get all trigger links in the location.' Every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose, with no redundancy or filler. It is an exemplar of conciseness.

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 tool with no parameters and a simple action, the description sufficiently conveys what the tool does and what it returns (trigger links). However, since there is no output schema, a bit more detail about the return structure or any limits could have made it even more complete. Still, it is adequate for the simplicity of the tool.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema is empty (coverage 100%). The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description correctly avoids adding unnecessary parameter details. No additional semantics are needed.

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 'Get all trigger links in the location' clearly states the verb (get), resource (trigger links), and scope (all in the location). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ghl_create_trigger_link and ghl_delete_trigger_link by explicitly indicating a read/list operation.

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 implies usage—when you need to retrieve all trigger links—but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives. For a simple list operation, the intent is clear from the name and description, but there is no explicit guidance or exclusions.

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