Add a Linear entity to your favorites using its ID. Quickly access important issues and projects.
Add an entity to the current user's Linear favorites
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| entityId | Yes | ID of the Linear entity to add to favorites |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | ||
| success | No | ||
| entityId | No | ||
| favorite | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, but does not contradict them.
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 sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and object.
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 single-parameter tool with output schema and informative annotations, the description provides necessary context. No gaps identified.
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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description only restates the schema's parameter description without adding new meaning.
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 verb 'add' and resource 'entity to Linear favorites', distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'linear_removeFromFavorites'.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'linear_removeFromFavorites' or other mutation tools. The description is purely declarative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.