slipbox_create_link

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses directional behavior and inverse link creation via bidirectional, and details link type semantics. However, it omits preconditions (e.g., notes must exist), error behavior, and side effects on the notes, which is a notable gap for a mutation 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 well-organized into clear sections: overview, link types, best practices, and args. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the link type enumeration is necessary for correct usage. No redundancy or filler.

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?

With five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the core aspects: purpose, parameter semantics, and usage guidance. However, it doesn't mention what the tool returns (e.g., created link ID) or state that source and target notes must already exist. These omissions slightly reduce completeness for an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description is the sole explainer. The 'Args' section gives explicit meanings for all five parameters, and the 'Link Types' section elaborates each allowed value for link_type. This is far more informative than the schema's bare titles and defaults.

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 opens with 'Create a semantic link between two notes,' clearly identifying the action and object. It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like slipbox_remove_link and slipbox_get_linked_notes by focusing on creation. The directional semantics and link type list further clarify its specific purpose.

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 'Best Practices' section provides actionable guidance: always add a description, use bidirectional=true for substantive relationships, and create links immediately after notes. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives (e.g., other link-related tools), so it falls short of a 5.

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