Get File Public URL

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds the non-obvious security consequence: anyone with the link can download until it expires. That is genuine value beyond the structured data, though it omits how long the link lasts and any permission requirements to mint one.

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 sentences, no filler, and the core capability plus its caveat are front-loaded in that order. Every clause 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?

With one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essentials including the return concept (a temporary link) and the expiry caveat. Minor gap: the expiry duration and whether the link can be revoked are unstated.

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% and the schema itself tells the agent where to obtain file_id (list_course_files, list_my_files, list_group_files). The description adds no further parameter meaning, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a temporary public download link for a file') and distinguishes it from a plain download by emphasizing the link works without logging in. It does not explicitly name the sibling download_file to route the agent, so a 4 rather than 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?

'Works without logging in' implies the share-with-someone-else use case, but the description never states when to pick this over download_file or get_file_metadata, nor any exclusion such as don't use for private/sensitive files. Usage must be inferred.

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