tgtrack_get_restore_yandex_link

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the purpose but does not disclose whether the action is read-only or has side effects (e.g., generating a new link vs. retrieving an existing one). 'Restore' may imply state mutation, but this is unclear.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loading the purpose. No redundant information. However, it could be slightly more precise (e.g., 'Retrieves a link to restore...').

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain the return value (e.g., is it a URL string?), potential errors, or prerequisites. A bit more context would be beneficial even for a simple tool.

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 coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'linkID' described in the schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states it's a link for restoring/re-issuing Yandex access via integration. The verb 'get' is implied by the tool name. It clearly indicates the resource (restore Yandex link) and distinguishes from sibling tools that create, delete, or update links or settings.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, common scenarios, or when not to use. Given many related sibling tools, explicit usage context would help.

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