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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent creation, and the description adds the materially important fact 'Shown once' — the code cannot be retrieved later, so the caller must capture it immediately. It still omits permission requirements and what happens on repeat calls, but the one-shot disclosure is real value beyond the annotations.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and the trailing 'Shown once.' carries a critical constraint with no filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 4-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description covers what is produced and that it is returned only once, which is the key context. It leaves gaps on defaults for max_uses, permission prerequisites, and whether an existing page must be in a particular state.

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 coverage is only 50%: label and expiry_days are documented in the schema, while max_uses and request_page_id have no description anywhere. The phrase 'for a private file request' weakly implies request_page_id's meaning, but nothing explains max_uses (e.g., single-use vs multi-use semantics) or its default.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Create an access code for a private file request,' which separates it from create_request_page, post_request_link, and send_request_link. It doesn't name a sibling explicitly, but the resource is distinct enough that an agent can route correctly.

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?

'to hand to one sender' implies the use case (per-recipient credential for an existing request page), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives such as post_request_link or send_request for distributing access.

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