link_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'link two tasks together' without explaining what linking entails, whether it's bidirectional, reversible, or requires any permissions. This is insufficient for a mutating tool.

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 concise sentence with no filler words. It states the core purpose efficiently, which is ideal for a simple tool.

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 simple nature (two parameters, no output schema), the description is extremely brief. However, because there are no annotations and no output schema, the description should compensate by explaining what linking means in ClickUp, its effects, and how it differs from related tools. The current description is incomplete for an agent deciding whether to invoke it.

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 input schema already provides clear descriptions for both parameters ('The ID of the first task' and 'The ID of the second task'), covering 100% of parameters. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action ('Link') and resource ('two ClickUp tasks'), making the purpose unambiguous. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like add_task_relationship, the verb 'link' and the opposite sibling 'unlink_tasks' provide implicit distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_task_relationship or unlink_tasks. The description simply states the action without any context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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