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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool only formats a URL, does not validate the run, uses a relative path routed internally, and produces a markdown link. This is complete for a simple, non-mutating helper.

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?

Four sentences, each contributing essential information: output behavior, example format, routing context, usage timing, and prerequisite caveat. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains 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?

For a one-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is fully sufficient. It covers the output format, example, path behavior, when to use it, and a clear prerequisite. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 describes sessionId as 'The run's session id,' and the description adds useful semantics by showing how it appears in the URL (session_id=abc123) and in the markdown link. This goes slightly beyond the schema without being verbose.

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 action: build a clickable markdown link to a run's detail page, and includes a concrete output example. It clearly distinguishes itself from run-inspection tools like automation_session_get by clarifying it is only URL formatting.

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 when-to-use guidance: offer it after explaining a run so the user can see the video, screenshots, and command list. It also names a prerequisite alternative: call automation_session_get first if the run has not been verified, and explicitly states this tool does not check existence.

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