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

The description adds transparency about the free limit and domain, beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose error behavior (e.g., slug conflicts) or other side effects. Annotations already indicate it's not read-only or destructive, so the description provides moderate additional value.

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 extremely concise (one line) with front-loaded key information using an emoji and action verb. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, output schema exists, and all parameters are described, the description covers the essential purpose, domain, and limit. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining the slug parameter with an example ('my-link' → apibase.short.gy/my-link), which is not in the schema—enhancing understanding.

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 URL from any long URL, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like web.url.stats or web.scrape.* by focusing on shortening.

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 provides context such as the domain (apibase.short.gy) and free monthly limit (1,000 links/month), helping the agent decide when to use this tool. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives.

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