get_v1_highlight_by_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It only notes a prerequisite for /s/ links but omits any details about return structure, side effects, permissions, or error conditions.

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 very brief (two lines), which is concise, but the first line is a special note and the second is a simple statement. It could be clearer and more structured, but it avoids verbosity.

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 lack of output schema, annotations, and parameter descriptions, the tool description fails to provide a complete picture. It does not specify what a highlight object contains, how to interpret the URL, or what the response looks like.

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 0% coverage, and the description does not explain the 'url' parameter. Instead, it misleadingly says 'by id', contradicting the parameter name and adding no semantic value.

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 'Get highlight object by id' but the tool is named 'get_v1_highlight_by_url' and accepts a 'url' parameter, creating confusion between id and URL. This misalignment reduces clarity.

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 includes a useful note about /s/ links requiring a call to /v1/share/by/url first, providing some usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_v1_share_by_url or give scenarios for use.

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