link_rows

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

The annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, indicating that repeated calls have the same effect, and the description adds context that this is the exclusive method for creating links, avoiding confusion with other write operations. However, no additional behavioral details like failure modes or side effects are provided.

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, zero wasted words. The description is concise and front-loaded, stating the core purpose first and then the critical constraint about exclusivity.

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 existence of a sibling tool unlink_rows and the lack of output schema, the description could benefit from mentioning output behavior, but the combination of annotations (idempotentHint) and schema (required parameters) makes the tool largely complete for its intended use.

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 coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (table, link_column, pairs) are already documented in the schema. The description does not elaborate on parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 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 explicitly states the verb 'Create links between rows' and the resource 'dedicated links endpoint', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_row or update_rows by noting that this is the ONLY way to create 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?

The description clearly states when to use this tool (to create links) and explicitly states that alternative methods (add_row, update_rows) cannot be used, providing clear guidance on when not to use other tools.

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