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

With no annotations, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states that a token is created, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it modifies the session, costs credits, or has rate limits). The agent cannot infer safety or mutability beyond the act of creation.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words. However, it may be too terse to be fully useful, borderline under-specification.

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?

Despite having an output schema (which could describe return values), the description omits critical context like required session existence, token lifetime behavior, or whether the token can be revoked. With no annotations, this is insufficient for a sensitive sharing operation.

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?

Only 25% of parameters are described in schema (npub has a description), and the tool description adds no parameter details. It mentions 'this session' implicitly for session_id, but fails to explain 'dpop_token' or 'expires_days'. Given low schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 action ('Create'), the object ('share token'), and the purpose ('so another user can access this session'). It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'taxsort_load_share_token' (load vs. create) and 'taxsort_create_session' (session vs. token).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., an existing session), or any context such as the requirement for an npub for billing. The agent is left without direction on appropriate usage.

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