Backlinks Anchors

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It labels the tool as 'Data Tool' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only status, authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand operational 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 a single sentence of 17 words, concise and front-loaded with the core action. However, it lacks any structural formatting (e.g., bullet points) and does not emphasize key parameters.

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 parameters, high schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides adequate but incomplete context. It omits information about output format (though schema defines 'output'), pagination limits, and potential errors. The lack of return value description is a gap.

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 100%, so each parameter is already documented. The tool description restates 'sorting and limit options' but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool retrieves anchor texts for backlinks to a specified target, with sorting and limit options. This is a specific verb-resource combination ('retrieves anchor texts') that distinguishes it from sibling tools like getAllBacklinks which return full backlinks data.

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 use when anchor text data is needed, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to prefer this over similar tools (e.g., getBacklinksRaw, getAllBacklinks). No exclusions or alternative tool recommendations are given.

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