create_short_url

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, etc., but the description adds valuable context: how URLs resolve under /s/<space>/goto/<slug>, the difference in behavior when space is set, and the prefix rules. However, it doesn't mention potential side effects (e.g., slug collisions, idempotency) or any output details beyond what's known. The description enhances transparency but doesn't exhaustively cover behavior.

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-structured with a clear definition, a parenthetical usage note, and a separate paragraph for the space parameter. Every sentence adds value, though the second paragraph is slightly repetitive. Overall, it is concise 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?

Given the 3 parameters and the nested params object, the description provides complete guidance on how to construct valid inputs, including the exact locator_id, the param format, and space-handling rules. It also references output behavior via resolve_short_url. The lack of detailed output schema explanation is acceptable since an output schema exists, and the description covers the complex space-scoping behavior thoroughly.

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%, so the description must fully compensate for parameter semantics. It explains the meaning of three parameters: locator_id (with exact value 'LEGACY_SHORT_URL_LOCATOR'), params (with url field), and space (targets Kibana space, with default behavior). This adds substantial meaning beyond the raw schema, which only provides types and patterns.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Create a Kibana short URL.' It specifies the required locator_id and params format, and distinguishes from the sibling tool resolve_short_url. The mention of 'Technical-Preview API' and supported locator variants adds precision.

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 usage context: indicates when to use it (creating a slug), how it interacts with spaces, and obvious distinctions from resolve_short_url (which resolves slugs). It also includes specific guidance on the `space` parameter and path prefixes, which helps agents choose this tool over alternatives.

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