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

With no annotations, the description carries the safety burden and does it well: unlisted link, private-by-default, access limited to that one scan, persists until stopped. It omits secondary traits such as whether re-creating returns the existing link (idempotency) or what is returned to the caller.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the operation, then the sharing semantics, then the consent guidance. No filler or restatement of the title.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers access model, persistence, and consent. The one real gap is that it never says the link itself is returned on create, which the agent needs since no output schema documents the response.

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 the baseline is 3; the description adds meaning beyond the schema by constraining job_id to the signed-in person's own scans and by tying both actions to the same link lifecycle. It adds little to the action enum, which the schema already documents well.

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 pair (create/stop) on a specific resource (the unlisted share link for one site scan), scoped to the signed-in person's own scans. No sibling tool deals with sharing, so the boundary is 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?

"Only create a link when the person has asked to share the scan" gives an explicit when-not condition plus a consent obligation, and "tell them who can open it" tells the agent what to communicate. No alternative tool exists to route to, so nothing further is needed.

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