list_work_package_file_links

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. The word 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state it is non-destructive, nor does it mention permissions, side effects, or what happens with invalid IDs. This is adequate but could be more transparent.

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 sentences: the first clearly states the tool's purpose, and the second clarifies the parameter. It is front-loaded, concise, and every sentence adds value without redundant words.

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 list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential: what it lists, the context (Nextcloud, Community Edition), and parameter usage. It lacks details on output format and error behavior, but overall it is sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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 only defines the type as integer or string, but the description adds critical meaning: it explains that work_package_id can be internal id (e.g., 952) or display_id (e.g., 'PROJ-51'), and explicitly warns it is not the UI display number. Since schema coverage is 0%, this is essential and well-provided.

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 explicitly states 'List Nextcloud file links attached to a work package', which gives a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'list_work_package_attachments' by specifying Nextcloud file links, making the tool's purpose clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_work_package_attachments.' It only clarifies the parameter format but lacks context for selection, which is insufficient for an agent to choose correctly.

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