linkNodes

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose side effects, but it only states the basic action. It does not mention whether the relationship is idempotent, what happens if the relationship already exists, how metadata/strength defaults behave, or what response is returned. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 with no filler, front-loading the core purpose. However, it is minimal and does not fully exploit the space to aid the agent, yet it remains efficient.

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 7 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is severely under-specified. It provides no information about return values, error cases, or behavioral nuances, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly in varied scenarios.

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 schema covers all 7 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; parameters like 'from', 'to', 'type', and optional ones are not elaborated in the description.

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 a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('relationship between two nodes'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like addNode (creates a node) and unlinkNodes (removes a relationship). However, it does not enumerate the relationship types or mention that it links existing nodes, leaving some ambiguity.

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 such as unlinkNodes or addNode. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., nodes must exist) or when creating a relationship is appropriate.

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