maltego_add_link

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only and not destructive, and the description adds behavioral details: it mutates by adding a directed link, returns a confirmation with link id, and raises an actionable error if an endpoint id does not exist. This goes beyond annotations.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line summary followed by a bullet list of parameters and return value. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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?

The description covers all essential aspects for a simple add-link tool: purpose, prerequisites (existing entities), parameters, return value (confirmation/error). No output schema needed as return type is simple. Complete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Despite the 0% schema description coverage metric, the description adds meaning by listing each parameter with examples (e.g., 'n0', 'n1') and clarifying optionality of label, beyond what the schema provides (which already has minLength and descriptions). The schema itself is well-documented, so the description enhances usability.

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 the verb 'Add', the resource 'directed link (edge) between two existing entities', and the scope 'on the active graph', distinguishing it from siblings like maltego_add_entity (adds entity) and maltego_delete_link (removes link).

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 specifies the prerequisite that source and target entities must exist ('between two existing entities'), providing essential context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context is clear.

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