pcloud_create_public_linkCreate a public share link for any file, granting access to anyone with the URL. Simplify sharing by generating a direct link.
Create a public share link for a file, exposing it to anyone with the URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.5.0Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseOutput schema / descriptionRemoved value: -"Generic wrapper for non-object return types."v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses the most important side effect: the file becomes accessible to anyone holding the URL. This goes beyond a generic 'create link' statement and warns of the privacy implication. It does not cover reversibility or permission requirements, but the core behavior is clearly stated.
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 one concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action ('Create a public share link') and immediately follows with the key consequence. Every word adds value.
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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and the critical privacy effect. It lacks usage routing, but that is already scored separately. The operational context needed to invoke the tool correctly is largely present.
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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does specify that the path refers to a file, adding meaning to the bare 'path' parameter. However, it does not clarify path format, existence requirements, or whether folder paths are rejected, so it only partially compensates for the low coverage.
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 states a specific verb ('create') and resource ('public share link'), and the phrase 'exposing it to anyone with the URL' clearly distinguishes it from sibling pcloud_get_file_link by emphasizing the public nature. An agent can tell this creates a shareable link rather than retrieving an existing one.
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 description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pcloud_get_file_link. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios where one should be preferred, leaving the agent to infer usage from the surrounding tool names.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.