Get signing link

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description does not contradict these and adds that it is a read operation. However, it does not disclose additional behavior like what happens if the entity is not found or if the user lacks permissions. Fairly standard for a simple getter.

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 single-sentence description is concise and front-loaded. It could include a brief note about the return format or usage context without becoming verbose.

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 tool has only two parameters, a clear purpose, and an output schema (to explain return values), the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the essential action and provides helpful parameter guidance.

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 covers 100% of parameters. The description adds value beyond the schema, especially for entity_type: it warns about knowing the type and suggests trying a different type if not found. This guidance aids the agent beyond the enum options.

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 retrieves a signing link for a document or document group. The verb 'get' and the resource 'signing link' are specific. While it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_document' or 'get_document_download_link', the purpose is unambiguous.

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 and parameter hints provide minimal guidance. The entity_type parameter includes a note suggesting to try a different type if not found, which is helpful. However, there is no explicit statement about when to use this tool versus alternatives or prerequisites (e.g., entity must exist).

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