create_external_test_link

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does disclose that the tool may activate web mode and creates an unlimited web assignment, which are meaningful side effects. However, it omits important behavioral context such as authorization requirements, reversibility, idempotency, and what happens if web mode is already active.

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 focused sentence with a colon and one clarifying clause. It front-loads the core purpose and contains zero filler words while conveying two key behaviors.

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 tool with five parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse to support correct invocation. Required fields like questionnaire_identity and responsible are not semantically defined, optional fields like identifying_data are opaque, and there is no indication of what the tool returns.

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% and the description does not explain any of the five parameters. The agent gets no guidance on what questionnaire_identity, responsible, identifying_data, profile, or comments mean or how to format them. The phrase 'unlimited web assignment' is about the outcome, not parameter semantics.

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 the specific verb 'Create' with the resource 'external web-interview test link' and further specifies the action as 'activate web mode if needed and create an unlimited web assignment.' This clearly distinguishes it from related siblings like activate_web_interview and create_assignment by describing a composite action.

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 when to use this tool by saying 'activate web mode if needed,' but it never explicitly states when to prefer this over the sibling tools activate_web_interview or create_assignment. There are no alternatives, exclusions, or conditions provided, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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