get-my-drive-item-download-url

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the URL is short-lived and direct, and no content is fetched. It does not quantify 'short-lived' or mention auth requirements, but it provides useful traits beyond the annotations.

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?

A single, well-constructed sentence that front-loads the key result (short-lived direct download URL) and immediately contrasts with content fetching. There is no wasted wording or repetition.

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 tool with no output schema, the description explains the essential return value (a URL) and its transient nature. It does not specify how short-lived the URL is or whether additional authentication is needed, but the tool is simple enough that these are minor gaps.

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% for the single itemId parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little about the parameter itself beyond associating it with a OneDrive file. The schema's own description 'Value for itemId' is also minimal, so the description does not meaningfully compensate or expand.

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 names a specific verb and resource: it gets a short-lived direct download URL for a OneDrive file. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from content-fetching tools by adding 'without fetching its content', which separates it from siblings like download-my-drive-item.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when a URL is needed rather than the file content. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, but the 'without fetching its content' phrasing sets the boundary against download tools. This is clear context, though not an explicit when-not/alternative statement.

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