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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond annotations: results are per-link and per-platform, and robot previews are counted as previews rather than clicks.

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 tightly written sentences with no redundant material. The short-link precondition is front-loaded, and the preview-vs-click clarification is included only because it affects interpretation of the metric.

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 simple read-only analytics retrieval with one parameter and no output schema, the description supplies enough conceptual detail to call and interpret it correctly. It does not describe the exact response shape beyond the conceptual dimensions, but the core semantics are present.

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% and there is only one parameter, post_id, already documented as 'Post id'. The description adds contextual meaning by indicating the post must have short links enabled, but it does not add further post_id formatting or retrieval semantics.

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 clearly states a specific resource: clicks on each short link, per platform, for a given post. It implies the short-link-specific scope but does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling analytics tools such as get_post_analytics or get_analytics.

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 description gives a clear applicability condition: the post must have been sent with short links enabled via options.shorten. It also clarifies that previews are not clicks, which is useful context. It does not name an alternative tool for posts without short links.

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