Update a link

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

Description excels beyond annotations: idempotentHint is true, but description reveals the destructive nature of URL changes (deletes preserved copies) and the required two-step confirmation flow. Has no contradiction with 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?

Four sentences covering purpose, merge behavior, tag replacement, URL destruction, and collection ownership. Concise but front-loads key insight first. Could be even tighter by trimming redundancy with schema, but overall efficient.

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?

Given 7 parameters (1 required), high schema coverage, and annotations providing idempotentHint, the description covers all critical edge cases: destructive URL change, tag replacement, collection ownership, and confirmation flow. No output schema, but return value is implied by the mutation nature. Covers everything an agent needs to avoid errors.

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?

Although schema coverage is 86%, the description adds significant meaning for critical parameters: explains tags argument replaces the list (not additive), URL change is destructive, and confirmation token is a two-step flow. The collection_id parameter is explained as owner-only.

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 tool "changes a bookmark" and explains its merge behavior for partial updates. It distinguishes itself from other link tools by detailing the destructive URL change and tag replacement semantics.

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?

Explicitly explains when to use (e.g., partial updates) and important caveats like tag replacement (not additive) and URL change requiring confirmation token. Implicitly distinguishes from create_link and other mutation tools.

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