link_notes

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool 'appends the link to the source note and records the edge in the graph,' and mentions a dryRun parameter. However, it does not specify permissions, reversibility, idempotency, or what happens if a link already exists.

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, no wasted words. The first sentence states the core action, the second explains the effect (appending and recording). Information is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The description explains the action and side effects, but with no output schema and no annotations, it should clarify the return value (e.g., success message or the appended line). It also omits error conditions, such as when source or target notes do not exist, and does not mention prerequisites (e.g., notes must exist).

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the overall purpose of the context parameter ('why they're connected') and the effect of dryRun. However, it does not provide additional nuance beyond the schema for each parameter.

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 states the specific action: 'Add a wiki-link from one note to another with a context sentence.' It clearly identifies the verb (add), resource (wiki-link), and the linking action, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_note or edit_note.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., find_connections). The description implies usage for creating connections, but does not provide contexts where it is appropriate or when to avoid it, nor mentions prerequisites or alternatives.

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