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

Adds meaningful behavior beyond the annotations: explicitly public, no authentication, maps to GET /share-pass/{token}, and shares the same API, billing, and rate limits. The warning not to invent other paths is an extra guardrail. No contradiction with readOnly/idempotent 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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds auth context, endpoint mapping, and a rate-limit note. Slightly redundant with the tool name and operationId, but every sentence contributes useful information and the length is appropriate.

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, one-parameter public metadata lookup, the description covers purpose, authentication, endpoint, and constraints. Nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly 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, token, is fully described in the schema as 'Share token (32 hex characters),' giving 100% coverage. The description does not add further parameter-level details, 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?

Clearly states the action ('Get shared pass metadata') and the resource (a shared pass), and specifies it returns public metadata with no authentication. The public-share-page use case and endpoint mapping further distinguish it from authenticated pass tools like getPass or downloadSharedPass.

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?

Provides clear context: used by the public share page, no API key required, and maps to a specific public endpoint. It does not explicitly list sibling alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the intended use is easy to infer.

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