get_backlinks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool uses Ahrefs and requires an API key, and specifies return values. This adds behavioral context beyond a simple read operation. However, it does not mention rate limits, pagination, or error handling, which would make it more complete.

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 concise sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence immediately states the tool's action and resource, efficiently front-loading the purpose.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does, its prerequisite, and what it returns. No missing critical information for agent selection and invocation.

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 100% (domain parameter already described). The description does not add new semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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 uses specific verb 'Retrieves' and resource 'backlink data for a domain', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'check_broken_links_on_page' or 'analyze_page_speed'. It also specifies the data returned: domain rating, total backlinks, and top referring pages.

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 mentions a prerequisite (CAPSOLVER_API_KEY) indicating when the tool can be used, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'keyword_ideas' or 'compare_competitors'. Usage context is implied by the tool's purpose but not explicitly stated.

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