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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: the link is permanently stopped, cannot work again, and must be recreated. It does not describe authorization requirements or edge cases, but the key irreversible consequence is disclosed.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and irreversibility. Every phrase adds useful information, and there is no redundant restatement of the tool name or annotations.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with an output schema and clarifying annotations, the description provides everything an agent needs: what the tool does, where the ID comes from, and that the action is irreversible. Return values do not need explanation because an output schema exists.

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 carry the parameter semantics. It does this well by explaining that link_id comes from create_cv_link or create_video_link, which is the most important detail for obtaining a valid value; only the ID format itself is left unspecified.

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 uses a specific verb ("Stop") and resource (CV or video link), making the operation immediately clear. It also references the sibling creation tools that produce the required link_id, so the agent can distinguish this from create_cv_link and create_video_link without opening the 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 clearly states the context for use: stopping an existing CV or video link, with the link_id sourced from the corresponding create tool. It does not explicitly compare against any alternative revocation or temporary-disable mechanism, but for this API surface there is no obvious alternative.

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