create_share_link_bundle

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

The description discloses the asynchronous nature of the operation: the ZIP is built in the background, the bundle starts as 'pending', and becomes usable only after get_share_link_bundle reports 'ready'. It also mentions the slug identifying the link. This adds valuable behavioral context beyond the minimal annotations (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false).

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 two sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the async behavior is explained immediately after. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

While the async flow is well explained, the description does not explicitly state what the function returns (e.g., a bundle ID or slug). Since there is no output schema, this is a notable gap. The mention of 'slug' implies it's part of the result but leaves the immediate response structure ambiguous.

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 coverage is 100%: each parameter (document_ids, file_version, expiration_days) already has a description. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 clearly states the action: 'Create ONE public share link for a ZIP of several documents.' This is specific (verb + resource) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_share_link (presumably single-document) and the get_share_link_bundle polling tool.

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 implies the appropriate use case—sharing multiple documents as a single ZIP bundle—and mentions the need to poll get_share_link_bundle. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives like create_share_link for single documents.

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