create_backlinks

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

The description discloses that the tool modifies the source note by adding wikilinks and creates the section if missing. With no annotations, this provides essential behavioral context. It could mention if existing links are overwritten or appended.

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 that clearly conveys the purpose, action, and fallback behavior. Every word is necessary and front-loaded.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple mutation tool, but it does not mention the return value or side effects like overwriting. Given no output schema, a note on return behavior would improve 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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions, but the tool description adds context about the specific section ('## Related') and the action of creating the section. This adds value beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 adds wikilinks in the '## Related' section of a source note, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_note or edit_note. The verb 'Adiciona' and resource 'wikilinks' are specific.

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 adding backlinks to a specific section, which is clear given the tool name and siblings. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus edit_note or when not to use it.

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