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

The description explicitly states 'Nothing is sent, nothing is read from their account by this call', which clarifies the tool's side-effect profile beyond annotations. It also discloses the expiration behavior, adding valuable context that annotations do not provide.

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?

The description is three sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose, then gives the usage sequence and key constraints. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the purpose, the follow-up action, the expiry, and clarifies side effects. Given the simple one-parameter schema and no output schema, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

The schema provides a clear description for playId ('The play to bind the seat to.'), covering 100% of parameters. The description does not add additional parameter-level semantics, so it relies on the schema, which is adequate. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('connect') and resource ('LinkedIn account to a play'), and clearly distinguishes from siblings like gtm_linkedin_status by describing the action of generating a link. It also frames it as 'the one cockpit step the play cannot run without', which 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?

It gives explicit step-by-step instructions: hand the URL to the human, wait for confirmation, then call gtm_linkedin_status. It also explains the link's 15-minute expiry and that a fresh link can be requested, effectively telling the agent when to call again. This is a clear usage flow.

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