Create OneDrive Share Link

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the required permission and that 'actual sharing scope depends on tenant policy.' However, it does not mention what the response contains (e.g., the share link URL), side effects, or any limitations beyond permission. Given the lack of annotations, this is partial disclosure but not fully transparent.

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 compact: three sentences in total. The first two sentences are information-dense, and the third provides Chinese intent mappings, which may be useful for multilingual agents though not strictly necessary. It is efficient and front-loaded with the primary 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?

The tool has only three parameters, one required, and no output schema. The description covers the main use case, required permission, and a behavioral caveat. It does not describe the return value, but for a straightforward action like creating a share link, the key context is present. The Chinese intent line adds value for intent detection.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no specific parameter-level detail beyond the schema, and the mention of 'file or folder' only loosely corresponds to itemId. No additional meaning is provided for type or scope enums.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Create a sharing link for a file or folder in the signed-in user OneDrive.' This distinguishes it from related siblings like drive_invite_item (which sends invitations) and sharepoint_create_share_link (which operates on SharePoint).

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?

It provides clear context by limiting scope to the 'signed-in user OneDrive' and notes the permission requirement (delegated Files.ReadWrite) and tenant policy dependency. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool versus the similar sharepoint_create_share_link.

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