create_short_link

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the return shape (id, shortUrl, variants) and that slug/variants are optional, but says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or how variant conflicts/link ownership behave.

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?

Three tightly written sentences with the primary action front-loaded and the follow-up call placed at the end. No filler, though it could be marginally tighter.

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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully explains return values, and it flags the A/B testing intent. It still leaves permissions, the undocumented 'params' variant field, and validation constraints unaddressed.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It names slug and the variant fields (title, description, imageUrl, templateId) but omits the variant 'params' object entirely and gives no hint of the 3-variant cap, slug pattern, or field length limits.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Create a short link with its own link preview') that clearly names the artifact produced, plus a note that it returns id/shortUrl/variants. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like create_template_from_url, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Gives a follow-up route ('Use the id with get_link_stats') and explains the purpose of A/B variants ('to test which preview gets more clicks'), but offers no when-to-use-vs-alternatives guidance or exclusions relative to the sibling preview/template tools.

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