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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: creating the link does not place an order, and fulfillment happens later on the site when the customer confirms. It omits link lifetime/expiry and whether carts can be reused, which is the remaining behavioral gap.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the outcome and followed immediately by the important non-ordering caveat. No filler.

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 no output schema, the description should say what the agent receives (a URL to hand to the customer) and ideally note link validity. The deferred-order semantics are covered well, but the return value and the meaning of the required items parameter are left unexplained, which is a meaningful gap for a two-parameter creation tool.

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 50%: the language parameter is documented in the schema, but the nested items objects (slug, quantity, 1–20 limit, max 30 items) have no descriptions anywhere. The description says only 'these products' without explaining that slug identifies a product or what quantity means, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 and resource: 'Make a link that opens the store's cart with these products already in it.' This is clearly distinguishable from every sibling, which are all catalog-browsing or lookup tools.

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?

The intended scenario is implied — a customer wants to check out a set of products — but the description never says when to prefer this over search_products/get_product, nor that slugs must come from the catalog first. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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