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

With destructiveHint=true already declared, the description adds real operational context: effect is immediate ('Future views stop immediately') and irreversible for already-copied content ('previously copied or downloaded information cannot be recalled'), plus an authorization constraint (creator-only). It doesn't address idempotent re-calls despite idempotentHint=true, so it stops short of 5.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with the core action first, then preconditions, then consequences. No padding, no repetition 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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation; the description covers the id's provenance, the authorization requirement, and the destructive/irreversible effects, which is everything an agent needs to invoke this single-parameter mutation correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate; it does by telling the agent the id originates from create_shortlist rather than being an arbitrary UUID, which is the one non-obvious fact about a single required uuid parameter. It adds no validation or format detail beyond the schema pattern.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Revokes a list link') and anchors it to a sibling ('the id create_shortlist returned'), so an agent can distinguish it from create_shortlist and preview_shortlist without reading either schema.

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?

It supplies a precondition ('only the user who created the link can revoke it') which implies who may call it, but never states when to reach for this tool versus siblings such as create_shortlist or preview_shortlist, nor any when-not guidance.

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