getExternallyLinkedWorkItems

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the basic purpose and references a Java API method, but fails to mention read-only nature, potential for large result sets, pagination behavior (though schema has page parameters), or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 short sentence, which is concise. However, it is overly simplistic and lacks essential details that would be expected for a tool with 7 parameters. It does not prioritize key information or structure it for quick comprehension.

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 7 parameters (including pagination), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'external links' are, how to handle pagination, or what the response format looks like. An agent would need to infer too much from the schema alone.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, nor does it clarify the relationship between 'projectId', 'workItemId', and external links. It meets the minimum but provides no extra value.

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 'Returns the external links to other Work Items.' which clearly indicates the tool's action and resource. However, it does not differentiate from its singular sibling 'getExternallyLinkedWorkItem', which likely returns a single link, causing potential confusion for an AI agent selecting the appropriate tool.

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 guidelines are provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'getExternallyLinkedWorkItem' or 'getLinkedWorkItems'. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, pagination, or filtering, leaving the agent without guidance on appropriate usage.

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