get_bookmarks

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states only that the tool returns a list, without mentioning pagination behavior, default filtering (e.g., archived=false), or that this is a read-only operation. This is minimal transparency for a tool with no annotations.

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, focused sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It is front-loaded and perfectly concise, though it sacrifices depth for brevity.

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?

Despite having 7 parameters and an output schema, the description gives no overview of the tool's capabilities (e.g., filtering, pagination, archived bookmarks). This leaves the agent under-informed about the tool's full scope, especially in the context of many sibling tools.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter-level information, but the schema already provides detailed semantics for each parameter, including defaults and formats.

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 ('Get list') and resource ('bookmarks from linkding'), making the core purpose obvious. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'search_bookmarks', which likely performs a similar listing function, so it falls short of a 5.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_bookmarks' or 'get_reading_list'. The description offers no context for selecting this tool or excluding others, leaving the agent to infer usage from the schema.

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