code_workspace_create_share_link

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

The description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as default role (viewer), expiration behavior for default 0 seconds, or whether the link is revocable. With no annotations, this leaves significant ambiguity.

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 concise (one sentence), but it sacrifices informativeness. It is front-loaded but lacks necessary details, making it only minimally adequate.

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 lack of schema descriptions and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not clarify the token's purpose, behavior, or return value, despite the tool having an output schema.

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 0%, and the description adds no semantic value beyond parameter names. The 'role' and 'expires_in_seconds' parameters are not explained, leaving their meaning and effects unclear.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('share-link token granting access to the workspace'), clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like 'code_workspace_revoke_share_link' and other code_workspace actions.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a workspace ID) or scenarios where share links are appropriate, leaving the agent without contextual decision support.

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