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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotent (idempotentHint=false). The description adds the auth requirement, which is useful behavioral context, but does not disclose other behaviors such as conflict handling or whether an existing redirect is overwritten. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 two sentences with zero filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the auth note follows without bloating the text. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with five parameters (three required) and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and auth prerequisite. The schema handles parameter documentation and the output schema covers return values, so the description is complete enough without over-explaining.

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 all five parameters are already thoroughly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Create') and resource ('redirect for a blog'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like update_redirect, delete_redirect, and list_redirects. The phrase is precise and leaves no ambiguity about the action.

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 that this tool is for creating redirects, and adds a prerequisite (owner/admin access via OAuth or user-scoped API key). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, so it falls short of a full 5.

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