create_data_auth_link

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the tool creates a URL, but doesn't disclose side effects, prerequisites (e.g., client credentials), whether the operation is safe/read-only, or any other behavioral traits. This is a minimal disclosure.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the action. It contains no unnecessary words and fully communicates the core operation in minimal space.

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 zero parameters and an output schema exists, the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, it lacks context about the OAuth flow, relationship to sibling tools (e.g., exchange_code), and when this should be invoked. This leaves it adequate but with clear gaps for understanding the full usage context.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty (100% coverage by virtue of no params). Per instructions, the baseline is 4 for 0 params. The description adds no parameter-specific details because none exist, but it doesn't need to.

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 action (create) and the resource (TrueLayer OAuth authorization URL) with context of data access. It distinguishes from sibling tools like exchange_code and complete_code_exchange by focusing on URL creation, though it doesn't explicitly place it in the OAuth flow order.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that this is the first step in the OAuth flow or that exchange_code should be used after obtaining the URL. No exclusions or alternative tool references are given.

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