getLinkedWorkItems

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full burden. It only says it returns outgoing links and mentions the Java API method. It does not disclose pagination behavior, whether results are limited, authorization needs, or what happens when no links exist. Information about fields, include, revision parameters is absent from the description.

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?

Two sentences convey purpose and scope with zero waste. First sentence states the action, second clarifies exclusions. Highly efficient and front-loaded.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not explain the return format (e.g., what fields are in a linked work item object), pagination behavior, or error cases. For a tool with 7 parameters, this leaves important gaps in understanding the full 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable but not augmentative. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it returns direct outgoing links to other Work Items, distinguishing from external links and backlinks. The verb 'Returns' and resource 'direct outgoing links' are specific, and the exclusion of external links and backlinks differentiates it from siblings like getExternallyLinkedWorkItems.

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?

Description implies when to use by stating what it does not pertain to (external links or backlinks), but does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The tool is one of many getters, and clearer direction to help an AI choose between variants is lacking.

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