Generate short-lived signed URLs to securely share files when share links are enabled. Provides temporary access for file sharing through the platform.
Mint a short-lived signed URL via file_share_link (when share links are enabled on the platform).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent_id | No | ||
| arguments | No | ||
| session_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses that the operation produces a short-lived signed URL and depends on a feature flag, which are genuinely useful behavioral traits. However, with no annotations, it does not clarify whether the operation is destructive, whether it requires special permissions, or what exactly is returned. It gives a behavioral sketch but not full transparency.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence states the action, the outcome, and the key precondition with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a tool with a simple purpose, even though more detail is needed elsewhere.
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?
With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation, the one-sentence description is not enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. It lacks any indication of required arguments, return value, or failure conditions.
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 0%, and the description mentions none of the three parameters, nor what should go inside the free-form 'arguments' object. The agent has no way to know how to specify which file to share or what options are supported. This is a complete gap in parameter semantics.
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 names a specific action ('Mint') and a concrete outcome ('short-lived signed URL'), which distinguishes it from sibling file tools like search, load, or generate. The phrase 'via file_share_link' is partly redundant with the tool name, and the target file is not specified, so it is clear but not maximally precise.
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 parenthetical '(when share links are enabled on the platform)' gives one important precondition, but there is no guidance about when to prefer this tool over sibling file tools or what to do when the precondition fails. No alternatives are named, leaving the agent to infer usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.