Create links

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=false. Description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: linking rules apply, refused links explain why, and the operation is a single undoable step. Good extra transparency.

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?

Dense but well-structured single paragraph. Front-loads the core action, then adds rules and undoability. No wasted words.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the key operational details: what it does, constraints (existing nodes, hive rules), error behavior (refused links explain why), and reversibility (one undoable step). Missing explicit output format details, but annotations and the undo hint cover most needs.

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 has 0% description coverage at the top level, but nested items do have descriptions for 'to', 'from', 'kind', and 'shape'. The description mentions 'strong = arrow from → to, weak = dashed' which adds some meaning but doesn't explain 'shape' or parameter structure fully. With nested schema descriptions present, 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?

States a specific verb+resource: draws lines between existing nodes. Distinguishes from delete_links/update_links/list_links by the 'create' operation, but doesn't explicitly contrast with the sibling update_links.

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?

Implies usage by saying nodes must exist and beacons follow special rules, but gives no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-alternatives guidance. No mention of update_links for modifying existing links.

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