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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. Beyond that the description adds real behavior: default ordering (newest first), cursor pagination semantics, the presence of `hasNextPage`, and the default exclusion of revoked links, though it says nothing about team-scoping/authorization requirements.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with what is listed and the ordering, then returns, then pagination, then the revoked filter. Every sentence carries information an agent would otherwise have to guess.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the returned fields (publicId, name, type) and the pagination flag hasNextPage. Combined with annotations and full schema coverage, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly for a simple read 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 description coverage is 100%, so `limit`, `cursor`, and `includeRevoked` are already documented in the schema with defaults and bounds. The description restates the same cursor and revoked-behavior semantics rather than adding new detail, so the baseline 3 applies despite its clarity.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('List the team's recording links') plus ordering ('newest first') and pagination model, and it distinguishes the tool from getRecordingLink (single fetch) and listRecordingLinkJams by making clear this returns links with publicId, name, and type.

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 concrete usage conditions for pagination ('Pass `cursor` ... to fetch the next page') and for the revoked-link case ('unless `includeRevoked` is true'), which is explicit when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly exclude any sibling, e.g. it never says to use getRecordingLink when you already have a publicId.

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