Backlinks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state safety, permissions, or edge cases such as whether the search is scoped to the current connection or if it returns an empty list. It is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes the key detail about link types. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 listing tool, the description explains what it does but omits output format details (e.g., whether it returns paths, titles, or IDs) since there is no output schema. It also doesn't mention any limitations or prerequisites. Given the simplicity, it is minimally adequate but leaves some gaps for an agent to infer.

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?

The schema descriptions for both parameters (path and connection) are detailed and self-explanatory (e.g., path includes an example). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies given the 100% schema coverage.

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 action ('List the notes that link to a given note') and specifies the link types (Markdown links or [[wikilinks]]), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_notes and search_notes. The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_notes or list_notes. There are no explicit exclusions or context cues, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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