hosting_createLoginLinksV1

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It notes the links are temporary but does not specify duration, prerequisite authentication, or whether the action is reversible. No information about side effects or response format is given.

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 extremely concise (two sentences), front-loaded with the main action, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter sourcing. It lacks details about return values or error cases, but the tool is straightforward enough that an agent can infer usage.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context for the 'software' parameter by telling the agent where to get the identifier (from a list endpoint), which goes beyond the schema's description. For 'username', no extra info is provided.

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 tool creates temporary auto-login links for a WordPress installation, using a specific verb and resource. It also explains how to obtain the required identifier, distinguishing it from sibling tools like those that install or update WordPress.

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 context on providing the WordPress installation identifier and where to obtain it, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like hosting_getInstallationJWTTokenV1. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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