Retrieve current shared link

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds only the mild context that the result is tied to the auth method. It says nothing about permissions, error behavior when no link exists, or how the two undocumented parameters affect the result.

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?

Short, and the 'Immich operation: GET /shared-links/me' line is genuinely useful for mapping to the API. However, the opening line simply duplicates the title, so the description spends a sentence without adding information.

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?

With no output schema and two fully undocumented parameters, the description should explain what the params do and roughly what comes back. It does neither, leaving the agent unable to form a correct call beyond passing no arguments.

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?

Two parameters (key, slug) exist with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions them or explains how they select the link. With low coverage, the description is expected to compensate, and it does not.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (retrieve the current shared link) and adds a scoping qualifier, 'associated with authentication method,' which tells the agent this is the caller's own link, not an arbitrary one. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like immich_get_shared_link_by_id or immich_get_all_shared_links, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as immich_get_all_shared_links or immich_get_shared_link_by_id. The phrase 'associated with authentication method' implies a condition (the authenticated user) but does not state it as a usage rule.

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