List New and Lost Backlinks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It states the tool returns a list, but lacks details on pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens if no results. The behavior beyond basic functionality is opaque.

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, which is concise but arguably under-specified for a tool with 12 parameters. It is front-loaded with 'Data Tool:' which is redundant. It earns a 3 for being efficient but lacking necessary detail.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (12 parameters, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the meaning of 'new or lost' relative to a baseline, nor does it mention prerequisites such as the target needing prior analysis. The description is not complete enough for effective use.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter. It does not clarify how parameters interact or provide additional context.

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 it returns a list of backlinks that are new or lost within a date range for a target. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like DATA_getAllBacklinks (all backlinks) and DATA_getNewLostBacklinksCount (count only) by specifying 'list of backlinks' and 'new or lost'.

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 for obtaining new or lost backlinks but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., count tool, referring domains tool). No when-not-to-use or prerequisite information is given.

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