shading.link_nodes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Link two shader node sockets' without disclosing behavioral details such as whether existing connections are replaced, socket compatibility checks, or side effects.

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 extremely concise (3 words) but at the expense of essential information. While brevity is valued, the lack of parameter details and usage context makes it ineffective.

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?

With 5 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to cover prerequisites, return values, or process, leaving the agent without sufficient guidance.

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 has 5 parameters with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter, forcing the agent to infer meaning solely from parameter titles. This is insufficient for correct usage.

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 'Link two shader node sockets', which clearly identifies the action and resource. The tool name includes 'shading' and 'link_nodes', reinforcing the purpose. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'compositor.link', which performs a similar linking function in the compositor.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'compositor.link' or 'shading.set_node_input'. The description offers no context for suitable scenarios or prerequisites.

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