Get checkout link for a drafted contract

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a URL for human action, requires a preview_id, and is non-destructive. Missing details on authentication or rate limits, but the operation is simple and the description is transparent enough.

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 with no wasted words. The description is front-loaded with the action and immediately provides the purpose and usage instruction.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and simple operation, the description covers the essential: what the tool does, what input it needs, and what to do with the output. It could mention URL validity but is complete enough for the context.

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 100% with one parameter already described in the schema. The description does not add extra meaning beyond referencing the preview_id, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states the verb 'Returns' and the resource 'URL', specifies the purpose (view preview and pay to unlock contract), and distinguishes from siblings by explicitly referencing start_contract_draft as a prerequisite.

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 implies usage after creating a draft with start_contract_draft and instructs to share the link with the user. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is clear among siblings.

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