Link User Story to Epic

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

Annotations already provide safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true). The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as whether linking replaces an existing relationship or how duplicate links are handled, so it does not go beyond what annotations already convey.

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, front-loaded sentence that wastes no words. It conveys the core purpose instantly and is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It does not mention what the operation returns or what happens in edge cases (e.g., already linked), though annotations help by indicating non-destructive and idempotent behavior.

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 fully describes both parameters: 'id' as Epic id and 'user_story' as User story id to link. The description adds only the word 'existing', which slightly implies a precondition but does not meaningfully enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 'Link an existing user story to an epic' clearly states the action (link) and the resources involved (user story, epic). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like epic_unlink_user_story, which performs the opposite operation.

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 such as epic_unlink_user_story or epic_related_user_stories. It does not mention prerequisites like whether the epic or user story must exist, nor any conditions for when linking is appropriate.

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