add_work_item_evidence_links

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the preview-versus-create distinction through confirm=true, but it omits permissions, validation failures, duplicate handling, and what preview returns.

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 two sentences, front-loaded, and free of repetition. Every sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool's mode of operation.

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 six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and low schema description coverage, the description is too sparse. Even though an output schema exists, the agent still lacks guidance on evidence structure, work_item_id requirements, project targeting, and validation behavior.

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 only 17%, so the description should compensate by explaining the six parameters. It only clarifies confirm; the meanings and formats of evidence, work_item_id, note, and project_id are left undocumented in both schema and 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 and resource: previewing or attaching evidence links to one work item. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish this operation from sibling tools such as add_work_item_relation or upload_work_item_attachment.

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 gives one useful usage rule: set confirm=true to create links, implying the default behavior is preview. However, it does not explain when to use this tool instead of add_work_item_relation, upload_work_item_attachment, or other work-item tools.

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