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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by specifying that it returns defaults for newly created smart links and reinforces that no data is created or modified, going slightly beyond the annotation hints.

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?

Three short, focused sentences. The description is front-loaded with purpose and adds only necessary context about scope and side effects. No wasted words.

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 getter with one optional parameter and an output schema present, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and that it has no side effects. Nothing significant is missing.

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 only parameter, response_format, is fully described in the input schema with its default and allowed values. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so with schema coverage effectively covering the parameter, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 gets current smart link preferences/defaults, with a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, but the purpose is unambiguous and distinct enough from related tools like youfiliate_update_preferences.

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 provides clear context: it returns default settings applied to newly created smart links and explicitly states it does not modify data. This implies when to use it (to view defaults) but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions.

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