get_backlinks

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It accurately states the tool finds backlinks, implying a read-only query. No contradictions, and the behavior is straightforward, though details like response format are missing.

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 very concise with a single sentence and arg list. It is front-loaded and clear, but could be improved with a more structured format.

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 no output schema, the description should hint at return values (e.g., note titles or paths). It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about the output format. The simple one-param tool could still benefit from completeness.

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 parameter 'path' lacks schema description (0% coverage). The description only repeats 'Path to the target note,' adding minimal value beyond the schema. No format, constraints, or examples are provided.

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 'Find all notes that link to the specified note,' which specifies the verb (find) and resource (backlinks). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_note_links, which likely get links from a note, not to it.

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 finding backlinks but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_note_links or search_notes. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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