noark5_get_root_links

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that authentication is required, that some returned relations require authentication, and that the output includes top-level navigation endpoints. It does not discuss failure modes or explicitly confirm read-only behavior, but for a simple root-links GET this is adequate and useful.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and keeps every sentence purposeful. The additional guidance about noark5_entity_links and noark5_filter_entities is relevant and non-redundant, making the length justified.

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 the tool has no parameters, an output schema exists, and the operation is a simple read of root links, the description covers prerequisites (authentication), what is returned, and how to continue the workflow. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to call it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on behavior and follow-up steps rather than inventing parameter details.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('root API links'), and clarifies that it returns all available relations from the API root, including authenticated ones. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like noark5_entity_links, which operates on a specific URL rather than the root.

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 gives explicit workflow guidance: use this tool after login to reveal top-level navigation endpoints, then follow a link and use noark5_entity_links for entity-specific discovery, and pass cleaned base URLs to noark5_filter_entities. This effectively tells an agent when and how to use it relative to alternatives.

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