Create a link

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

Although there are no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: the title is auto-fetched when no name is given, the link goes to 'Unorganized' without a collection, collections are created on the fly, and duplicate prevention returns 409. This far exceeds the minimum for an unannotated 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 a lean three sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the core action ('Saves a bookmark') and packs essential behavioral details into a compact, readable format. Every sentence earns its place.

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 creation tool with no output schema and only one required parameter, the description covers all critical aspects: mandatory URL, optional title auto-fetching, collection behavior (including creation and 'Unorganized' default), and error handling for duplicates. It is complete and self-sufficient.

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 high at 83%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the auto-title behavior and the collection creation logic, which goes beyond the schema. However, it does not elaborate on the tags or description parameters beyond what the schema already says.

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 starts with 'Saves a bookmark,' which is a specific verb+resource combination that clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like search_links, get_link, or delete_link. It adds immediate context about Linkwarden's automated title fetching and preservation queueing, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly explains when to omit the name parameter (to let Linkwarden fetch the title), when the collection is optional, and what happens if duplicate links are prevented (HTTP 409). This provides clear guidance on when and how to use the tool, though it could mention alternatives like update_link for existing links.

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