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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and open-world behavior, but the description adds valuable context: the link is short-lived and the user must open it due to Meta's browser popup requirement. This explains why the tool is not fully automated.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and no wasted words. It conveys the core purpose and the critical behavioral constraint efficiently.

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?

With only two optional parameters, an output schema, and clear annotations, the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool. It explains the necessary user interaction and link lifetime concept, though it could mention when to prefer this over alternative connection methods.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for both parameters, including defaults, min/max, and enum values. The description adds no further parameter-level details, so baseline 3 is appropriate given the 100% schema coverage.

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 the tool creates a short-lived browser link for WhatsApp Business Embedded Signup, a specific verb + resource. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like create_plan_upgrade_link or get_whatsapp_connection_status.

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 clear context: the user must open the link because Meta requires a browser popup. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when not to use, but the prerequisite and workflow are unambiguous.

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