gmb_actions_locations_placeactionlinks_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as authentication needs, rate limits, or response shape, providing no value beyond what annotations already convey.

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 a single sentence with no filler, repeating the endpoint template and a succinct action statement. It is front-loaded with the HTTP method and resource, achieving maximum conciseness.

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?

The tool is a simple read operation with annotations covering safety and schema covering parameters. However, the description lacks any domain context about what a place action link is, leaving the purpose somewhat abstract for agents unfamiliar with the concept.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not supplement any parameter information; it does not explain the name pattern or the fields parameter beyond what the schema provides.

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's action ('Gets') and resource ('place action link'), making it unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create/delete/patch by indicating a fetch operation.

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 usage: use this tool when you need to fetch a specific place action link by name. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., the list tool for enumerating links), so it relies on inference.

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