Get a preview link of a DataLens HTML page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that by disclosing that the link is signed, temporary, and expires ('stops working after a while'), though the TTL is left vague and nothing is said about permissions or the shape of the returned URL.

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 efficient sentence with the key caveat front-loaded and no filler. It is slightly under-sized for a five-parameter tool, but there is no wasted text.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully characterizes the return value as a signed, expiring link. However, for a tool with five parameters covering language, theme, and revision selection, it omits how the link should be used or how branch/rev_id affect it, leaving the picture only partially complete.

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 all five parameters (lang, theme, branch, rev_id, entry_id) are already documented in the schema, including the branch/rev_id exclusivity note. The description adds no parameter meaning, 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?

The description is a noun phrase describing the artifact ('A temporary signed link that shows the page') rather than stating the action. Combined with the name and title the intent is inferable, but the description itself never says it retrieves/generates a link, and it does nothing to distinguish itself from siblings like datalens_htmlpages_get.

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 alternatives (e.g., datalens_htmlpages_get vs. this preview tool). The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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