Resolve an alias keyword to its stored URL so you can retrieve the correct link without searching.
Resolve an alias keyword to its stored URL
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| alias | No | Alias keyword to resolve (required) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read that returns a URL, but says nothing about behavior when the alias is unknown (error vs null), whether expired/disabled aliases resolve, or any permission requirements.
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?
One front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification that the other dimensions penalize.
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?
For a one-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description implies the return (the stored URL). However, with no annotations, it should say more about failure modes and whether the returned URL is raw or a redirect target.
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% and the single parameter is documented as 'Alias keyword to resolve (required)'. The description's wording mirrors the schema rather than adding format, case-sensitivity, or resolution-scope details, 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 ('resolve') and resource ('alias keyword' → 'stored URL'), making it distinguishable from siblings like search_links, list_links, and add_link. It does not explicitly name or contrast those siblings, keeping it just 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?
No guidance on when to use this versus search_links, list_links, or get_link's counterpart add_link. The single sentence gives no exclusions, prerequisites, or selection criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.