Historique des commandes de backlinks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description's extra value is the explicit GET endpoint and the newest-to-oldest ordering. That discloses behavior beyond the structured 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?

The description is compact, front-loaded with the purpose, and adds only useful context: scope, ordering, and endpoint. No filler sentences.

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 list operation, the combination of sorted scope in the description, full parameter docs in the schema, and read-only/idempotent annotations is sufficient. The absence of an output schema is not a major gap for this endpoint.

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 documents siteId, limit, offset, and search. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb-resource pair: listing backlink order history, scoped to 'Commandes MyBack.link du site'. The endpoint and sorting make it distinct from siblings such as orderBacklinks and getMybacklinkStatus.

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?

It clearly frames the tool as the read-only order history for a site, which is the intended use case. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous enough to route a caller.

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