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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a genuine behavioral trait: the parent/sublink inheritance model, which helps interpret results. However, it omits pagination behavior (cursor), the default status filter (active), and whether omitting space spans all spaces.

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 compact sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence is somewhat tangential to tool selection, though it does aid interpretation of returned links.

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 zero-required-parameter list tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient; the parent/sublink explanation usefully compensates for the missing output schema. Minor gaps remain on pagination behavior and default filtering.

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 100%, so every parameter (limit, space, cursor, status) is already documented in the schema, including defaults and ranges. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ("Liste") and resource ("liens"), and adds a useful domain distinction between PARENT links (destination) and PLACEMENT/sublink (UTM, inherits the rest). It does not distinguish itself from the sibling get_link, so a single-link fetch vs a bulk listing is left to inference.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_link (single link) or list_spaces, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given. Usage is only implied by the verb "Liste".

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