draft_sitelinks

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

Annotations set readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool 'returns a PREVIEW' and requires a follow-up call to execute. This clarifies the non-destructive, non-read-only nature and provides behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradiction found.

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 concise and well-structured. It starts with a clear one-line purpose, then uses a bullet-like list for the sitelinks structure. No redundant sentences. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers the main purpose, parameter details (except customer_id), usage context, recommendations, and next steps. Has an output schema, so return value explanation is not needed per rules. Lacks explanation of customer_id but otherwise complete for a drafting tool with preview.

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 0%, so the description bears full burden. It explains the sitelinks parameter in detail with sub-fields (link_text, final_url, description1, description2) and constraints (max chars). However, it does not explain the customer_id parameter (only default shown) or note that it's optional.

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 drafts sitelink extensions for a campaign and returns a preview. It uses specific verbs and resources (draft sitelinks, returns preview). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling 'draft' tools like draft_callouts or draft_keywords, which share a similar draft-and-preview pattern.

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?

Provides clear context: 'Call confirm_and_apply with the returned plan_id to execute.' Also includes a Google recommendation on minimum sitelinks (at least 4, fewer than 2 may not show). Does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, but the guidance is adequate for usage.

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