generate_url

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it may fetch the entity if needed, supports two host modes, and uses hash routes for assets. It does not mention potential side effects or API costs, but given that this is a read-only URL generator, the disclosure is sufficient.

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 well-organized into logical sections: overview, host modes, path patterns, identifier rules, and overrides. The first sentence is a clear summary, and every subsequent line adds necessary detail without redundancy. Length is appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description fully explains the output format by listing path patterns for every entity type and how hosts are constructed. It covers all nine parameters and provides enough context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without ambiguity. Complete for a URL-generation tool.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds substantial cross-parameter meaning beyond the schema. It explains which identifiers are valid for each entity type, that lightboxes use a composite '{id}-{name}' slug, and that tags can optionally include a name for prettier URLs. This guidance is not present in the schema alone.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Generate') and resource ('direct deep-link URL to a Mediagraph entity'), enumerating all supported entity types. This clearly distinguishes it from any sibling tool, none of which generate URLs.

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 provides explicit use cases and contextual guidance: it explains identifier rules per entity type, when to use each parameter, and how to override hosts for staging. It also implicitly states when the tool is appropriate—whenever a deep-link URL is needed—and gives concrete examples.

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