Roo — make shortlink permanent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the shortlink stops participating in auto-expiry, that a 90-day plan period applies, and that the action counts against a permanent-shortlink limit. It also reveals reversibility by directing the user to un-make it. It could mention permissions or errors, but the core behavioral impact is well covered.

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 compact and front-loaded: the main action is stated first, followed by key consequences and the reverse path. Every sentence contributes useful information with no filler.

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 one-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: the effect, the plan expiry context, the limit impact, and the way to reverse the operation are all included. A minor omission is whether the operation can fail or be blocked by quota, but this is not required for correct invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents the single `id` parameter clearly. The description adds minimal parameter-level detail beyond the schema, but since there is only one simple required parameter and the description restates its purpose, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Mark a shortlink as permanent'. It clearly differentiates this tool from the sibling roo_update_permanent_settings by stating the opposite operation uses that other 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?

It gives clear context for when this tool applies (shortlinks subject to plan auto-expiry) and explicitly points to roo_update_permanent_settings for the reverse operation. It does not exhaustively compare with every sibling, but the key alternative and condition are covered.

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