Resolve a URL/slug to a drop

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses key behaviors: owner-scoping, pass-through of drop_… ids, and the conceptual distinction between locators and identifiers with drift risk. These go well beyond annotations and provide actionable behavioral context without contradiction.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and organized into distinct, non-redundant segments: purpose, scoping, usage, input variants, and best practice. Every sentence earns its place, and the structure makes it easy to scan.

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?

Given the single parameter, existing annotations, and output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: input forms, scope, output contents, related tools, and error behavior ('returns no match'). It leaves no important behavior unexplained.

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?

Even though the schema already covers the parameter, the description adds meaningful context by explaining that URLs/slugs are locators that can drift while the id is stable, and that the tool accepts a drop_… id and passes it straight through. This enriches the raw schema definition.

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 ('resolve') and resource ('a drop's public URL or slug') and explicitly states the output ('the drop itself, including its drop_… id'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by framing the tool as the required first step for editing tools that need the id.

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 explicit usage instructions: 'resolve here, then call dropthis_update_content / dropthis_update_settings / dropthis_delete with the returned id.' It also clarifies owner-scoping and that unknown or foreign URLs return no match, effectively telling users when not to expect a result.

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