Create a Perssua session link

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, matching the description's non-mutating 'build a link' framing. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: the link is activated on click, may include an https launcher when configured, and importantly 'Inline links never auto-submit — the user reviews the prefilled prompt in Perssua.'

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 sentences, each earning its place: one for what the tool builds, one for when to use it, and one for the critical non-auto-submit caveat. Information is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, usage context, a key behavioral caveat, and the role of all major parameters. With readOnlyHint=true and no output schema required, this is a complete and well-scoped description for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the input schema documents all four parameters. The description names prompt, assistant, and context in the opening sentence but adds little semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. This is an appropriate baseline-3 score.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Build a perssua:// deep link...'. It also clarifies the purpose by stating it starts a session with an assistant, prompt, and context when clicked, distinguishing it from start_session even without naming it.

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?

It explicitly states when this tool should be used: 'from hosted/remote connectors (ChatGPT, Grok, web chats) where this server cannot reach the user's machine.' This is clear contextual guidance, though it does not explicitly name the alternative (start_session) or state a when-not-to-use condition.

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