Outbound Links

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

Annotations already carry the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), and the description aligns with them. It adds domain context — clicks on external URLs with frequency — but not deeper behavior such as how outbound clicks are attributed, aggregation granularity, or whether data is sampled.

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, zero waste: the first delivers the action and resource, the second explains the return value. The core scoping phrase 'external URLs' is front-loaded.

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 filtered-list reporting tool, the description plus the rich 100%-covered schema and safety annotations cover the essentials: data domain, common params, and safety profile. Minor gaps remain — no output schema means the response shape is only hinted at ('external URLs... how often'), and there's no note on how outbound link tracking is configured or enabled.

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%, including detailed docs for siteId, page/limit, date alternatives (startDate/endDate vs pastMinutesStart/pastMinutesEnd), timeZone, and the filter dimension enum with a user_id caveat. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so 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 and resource: 'Get outbound link clicks tracked on the site,' and clarifies the value with 'Shows which external URLs users are clicking and how often.' The resource (external link clicks) is semantically distinct from the 47 sibling analytics tools like get_overview and get_metric.

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 use case is implied by the domain — outbound link click analytics — but the description never explicitly says when to prefer this over siblings such as get_metric, get_events, or get_overview, nor does it state exclusions. An agent must infer the boundary from the term 'external URLs' alone.

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