uisp_get_data_link

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It accurately signals a read-only retrieval via 'Get', but it doesn't disclose the shape of the returned detail, error behavior, or permissions. This is acceptable for a simple get-by-ID yet leaves specifics to inference.

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 short sentence with no filler; the key information (action, resource, identifier) is front-loaded and immediately parseable.

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 low-complexity, one-parameter get-by-ID tool, the description and schema are nearly sufficient to invoke it correctly. Lacking an output schema, it would benefit from a hint about the response format, but the missing information is minor.

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?

The single parameter is fully documented in the schema, and the ID description adds provenance ('from uisp_list_data_links') beyond the raw type. This tells the agent where to obtain a valid value, improving call correctness.

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 ('Get') and resource ('single data link's detail') plus the selection mechanism (`by ID`). It clearly identifies the operation, and the 'single' qualifier separates it from list-style siblings, though it doesn't name 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?

No explicit guidance explains when to call this tool instead of uisp_list_data_links or uisp_list_site_data_links. The only contextual clue is in the parameter schema ('from uisp_list_data_links'), which implies an ordering but doesn't state selection criteria.

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