APIbase

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and successfully discloses the rate limit (1,000 free links/month), the return domain (apibase.short.gy), and the external service provider (Short.io). It does not, however, mention error handling behaviors or idempotency.

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?

Four short, front-loaded sentences with zero waste: purpose, optional feature, return format, and operational constraints. Every sentence earns its place with high information density.

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 low complexity (3 params, 1 required) and lack of output schema, the description compensates by specifying the return domain. It covers rate limits and service provider, though it could specify the exact response structure format.

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%, providing detailed descriptions for all three parameters (url, title, slug). The description mentions 'Optional custom slug' which aligns with the schema, but adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema already provides, warranting the baseline score.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Create') and clear resource ('short URL'), explicitly stating the core function. It effectively distinguishes from sibling 'web.url.stats' by focusing on creation rather than analytics.

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?

While it mentions the optional custom slug feature and rate limits (1,000/month), it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus siblings like 'web.url.stats' or prerequisites like authentication requirements for the Short.io service.

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