Resolve a sharing link

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-schema context: the required Files.Read.All scope and that a user can consent without an administrator. It does not describe error or failure behavior (e.g. invalid/expired links), which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Two tightly written sentences that are front-loaded with the outcome and then the routing guidance; every clause carries information. The em-dash aside is slightly dense but does not waste words.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by naming the returned fields, and it covers auth scope, the link sources, and the alternative tool. An agent has everything required to call it correctly.

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% for the single shareUrl parameter, and the schema already explains it is a OneDrive/SharePoint link resolvable to a drive address. The description's example sources (Teams contentUrl, mail reference attachment) mirror the schema text rather than adding new semantics, so 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?

States a specific verb ('resolves') and resource ('OneDrive/SharePoint sharing link') and explicitly enumerates what it returns (driveId, itemId, name, kind, size, mime type, webUrl). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling files_parse_document, which it names.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it (first step from a Teams contentUrl or mail sourceUrl sharing link to the file) and offers the alternative path ('skip it and pass the link straight to files_parse_document as shareUrl'). Both the use case and the alternative are named.

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