get_outlinks

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

There are no annotations to indicate read-only behavior or side effects. The description mentions the 'rebuildable link index' but does not explain whether this tool triggers a rebuild, what happens if the index is stale, or what errors might occur. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated.

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 extremely concise, using two short sentences without any redundant information. It front-loads the core action and relevant context about the link index, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 simple tool with one parameter, the description provides sufficient context about what it does and how it relates to the link index. However, it does not describe the output format or return value, which could be relevant for an agent deciding how to use the result, especially since no output schema is provided.

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 single parameter 'path' is well-described as a vault-relative note path with an example format. This gives the agent a clear understanding of the expected value, though it lacks additional constraints like required extension or path normalization details.

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 lists every indexed link from a single note, and the name get_outlinks reinforces the purpose. It is specific about the resource (one note) and the action (list links), though 'indexed link' could be slightly more explicit about whether it includes all outgoing links or only those in the index.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus related tools like get_backlinks, aside from mentioning the same link index. It lacks prerequisites, typical use cases, or conditions under which this tool should be preferred.

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