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. The description repeats 'Read-only' and mentions returned fields, but those return values are already covered by the output schema, and it does not add pagination or search behavior details.

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 tightly written sentences with no wasted text. The primary usage condition is front-loaded, followed by return information and read-only status.

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 four-parameter list tool with full schema descriptions, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description provides enough context to select and invoke it correctly. It covers when to use it and summarizes what it returns without needing to duplicate schema-level details.

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 q, sort_by, per_page, and sort_order are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline expectation when schema coverage is high.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('find their short links') and distinguishes the tool from single-link operations by explaining that it returns IDs needed before changing or checking clicks. An agent can identify it as the list operation among siblings like get_short_link and update_short_link.

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 clear usage conditions: when the user wants to find their short links, or when an ID is needed before changing or checking clicks. It does not explicitly name the alternative tools such as get_short_link or get_short_link_clicks, but the downstream-use framing provides strong contextual guidance.

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