nexo_claim_link

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

The description does not disclose whether the linking operation is destructive, reversible, or if it modifies the original claims. With no annotations, the agent lacks insight into side effects, permissions, or idempotency.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it sacrifices important information. It could be expanded with key details while remaining brief.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or the effect of linking (e.g., whether it creates a new entity or modifies existing ones).

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?

Input parameters are mostly defined only by the schema with no descriptions. The description lists example relation values but does not clarify the meaning of source_claim_id, target_claim_id, or the confidence parameter range and default behavior.

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 (link) and the objects (two claims) with a non-exhaustive list of relation types. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like nexo_claim_add or nexo_claim_get.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus others, such as nexo_claim_add for creating claims or nexo_claim_lint for checking them. There is no mention of prerequisites or alternatives.

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