getWorkbookLinks

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it reads data (retrieves weeks), returns specific content (titles with RTF URLs), and auto-defaults the issue. However, it does not mention error behavior or authentication requirements.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the key action 'STEP 1: Get...', and no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple retrieval tool with well-documented schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, and return format. It lacks details on edge cases or error handling, but is largely complete given the tool's straightforwardness.

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?

All 4 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond schema, e.g., clarifying the auto-default for issue, but largely repeats schema info.

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 retrieves CLM meeting workbook weeks, specifying it returns weekly titles and RTF download URLs. It explicitly positions this as STEP 1, distinguishing it from sibling tools like getWorkbookContent.

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 says to use this tool FIRST when a user asks for CLM workbook content, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use it or name alternatives beyond the step sequence.

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