linkedin_get_auth_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states that the tool generates a URL, which is a safe, read-only operation. However, it does not disclose if the tool makes external calls, requires authentication, or has rate limits. For a simple URL generation tool, the description is minimally adequate.

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 a single, concise sentence with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficient in conveying the tool's function.

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 (one optional parameter, no output schema, low complexity), the description is complete enough. It explains the tool's purpose without needing to detail return values. The context of OAuth flow is implied, but the description could mention what to do with the generated URL for better completeness.

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% (the single 'state' parameter is described). The description adds no additional context beyond the schema. Per the scoring rubric, high schema coverage gives a baseline of 3, and the description does not detract or add value.

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 action ('Generate') and the resource ('LinkedIn OAuth authorization URL'). It is distinct from sibling tools like linkedin_exchange_code, which handles the code exchange step, and other tools that involve creating posts or analyzing profiles.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as linkedin_exchange_code. However, by naming the output as an 'authorization URL', it implies a prerequisite step in the OAuth flow, providing limited implicit guidance.

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