Linkbio page

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

Adds real context beyond annotations: credit consumption, the confirm=true gate, caching semantics, and the clarifying note that 'read-like POST requests do not publish to social platforms' — which usefully explains the readOnlyHint=false flag. Omits whether credentials/account scoping is required or the failure modes, so not a full 5.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and return shape, then covers credits and the removal contact. Mostly tight, though the removal-request sentence is tangential to invocation and slightly dilutes focus.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries return-value burden — and it does describe the returned fields (handle, id, socials, email, website, links). Combined with credit/cache behavior, an agent has enough to invoke it correctly, though account-scoping and error behavior are unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 100%, with each of the four parameters (url, account, confirm, cache_max_age) already documented and the enum enumerated. The description adds no per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Scrapes a Linkbio (lnk.bio) page by URL') and enumerates exactly what it extracts, so an agent can distinguish it from the many sibling page scrapers (linktree, komi, pillar, linkme) without opening any schema.

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 confirm=true prerequisite and the cache-vs-live tradeoff imply usage conditions, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-prefer-alternatives guidance and no mention of the sibling page tools (linktree_linktree_page etc.). Usage is implied rather than stated.

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