pin_url

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond that — the resulting URL is public, follows the /p/{id} pattern, and renders link-preview cards — but says nothing about behavior for missing or non-public pins (error vs null), which matters for a tool that produces public links.

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?

One sentence plus a short fragment, with the core purpose front-loaded and nothing bloated. The trailing 'Pages have link-preview cards' is marginally tangential to invoking the tool, though it does inform how the returned URL behaves when shared.

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?

A simple single-parameter tool with an output schema and read-only annotations needs little more, but the description omits the one thing an agent would want to know before calling: what happens if the pin is not public or does not exist. Adequate, not complete.

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?

Only one parameter with 0% schema description coverage, so the schema field 'Id' carries no meaning on its own; the description partially compensates by clarifying that it is a pin id. It does not state the accepted format (numeric, slug, prefixed) or whether the id must reference an existing public pin.

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: 'Return the public, shareable page URL for a pin id', complete with a URL template showing the exact shape of the result. It is unambiguous against get_pin (data retrieval) and search_pins, though it never names those siblings to make the distinction explicit.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose: call this when you need a shareable link rather than pin data. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer it over get_pin, nor any prerequisite or exclusion, so the agent must infer the routing decision.

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