Share an image link

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

The description adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: the link opens in a browser without an account, copies the image into the recipient's workspace for editing and export, exposes the image publicly for 7 days, and carries an explicit confidentiality warning. These details align with openWorldHint=true and do not contradict the annotations.

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 short and front-loaded: it first explains what the link does and then gives the important 7-day public-access warning. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition.

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?

For a public-sharing operation, the description covers the essential behavioral and security context: no recipient account, workspace copying, 7-day expiration, and who should receive the link. With an output schema present and the parameter fully documented, no critical invocation detail is missing.

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 schema fully documents the single image_id parameter, so the baseline is 3 under high schema coverage. The description reinforces that it operates on one specific image but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 conveys that this tool produces a shareable link to one image and its annotations, and it distinguishes that link from internal viewing by noting it opens in anyone's browser with no account needed. It stops short of an explicit action verb such as 'creates' or 'generates,' and it does not name sibling tools, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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?

It gives clear usage context and a security-sensitive constraint: share only with people who may see the image, because anyone with the link can view it for 7 days. It does not explicitly compare this against alternatives like get_image, view_image, or export_annotations, so it lacks named alternatives but provides strong when/when-not guidance.

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