list_linksRetrieve short links on your account, newest first, with click counts; use limit and cursor to page through results.
List short links on the account, newest first, with click counts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | How many to return. Default 20. | |
| cursor | No | Cursor from a previous call, to fetch the next page. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that, namely the ordering ('newest first') and the fact that click counts are included in results, but says nothing about pagination termination or result size limits.
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?
A single clause-dense sentence with zero filler, and the ordering and content details are front-loaded. Nothing could be removed without losing information.
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 simple two-parameter list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description conveys scope, ordering, and included fields. It falls short only on pagination behavior and any usage context, which is a minor gap at this complexity.
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 both limit and cursor are fully documented in the schema, making a baseline of 3 appropriate. The description adds no extra syntax, default values, or cursor semantics beyond what the schema provides.
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 ('List short links') plus scope ('on the account'), ordering ('newest first') and returned content ('click counts'). The resource is distinct from siblings like list_secrets and create_short_link, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternative tools such as list_secrets for a different resource type. The sentence describes the output but never helps an agent decide whether this is the right call.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.