get_official_links

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

No annotations provided, but description clearly indicates a read-only, nondestructive operation by using 'Return'. It does not mention side effects, but for a simple link retrieval, this is sufficient. Could have noted no side effects explicitly.

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 complete sentence, no extraneous words. Front-loaded with verb 'Return' and resource. Perfectly concise.

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 no output schema, the description appropriately indicates the return value is a 'canonical list of official links' with examples. It fully describes the tool's function without missing critical details.

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 zero parameters, so description does not need to explain parameters. The description adds meaning beyond the empty schema by clarifying the tool's purpose and output.

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 returns 'the canonical list of official links for Gemma AI' with specific examples (website, support, docs). It uses a specific verb 'Return' and resource 'official links', distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_models and get_pricing.

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 implies usage: when you need official links for Gemma AI. Sibling tools have different purposes (listing models, pricing), so no explicit alternatives needed. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria.

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