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

Beyond annotations, it discloses important behavior: the link expires after 30 minutes, works once, does not connect anything by itself, and never exposes passwords or tokens in the conversation. These details materially help the agent understand the security and state implications.

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 front-loaded with the core action and then adds expiry, single-use behavior, security context, and usage guidance. Every sentence contributes useful information without unnecessary length.

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?

Given zero input parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering safety hints, the description is complete enough to call the tool correctly. It explains what the tool returns conceptually (a link) and the constraints around using it.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description mentions fields the person fills in on the linked form, but those are user-facing form fields rather than tool inputs, so no additional parameter semantics are required.

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 and resource: 'Get a link' to 'connect a WordPress site'. It clearly identifies the WordPress-specific connection flow, distinguishing it from siblings such as connect_google, connect_meta, and connect_crm.

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 clear triggering conditions: use when a tool reports the platform is not connected, or when asked to connect it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions, but the platform-specific scope makes the usage context sufficiently clear.

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