list_links

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true; the description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: results are active-only, ordered newest first, include access counts, and are cursor-paginated. It also discloses the required shares:read scope, which annotations do not cover.

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 covering scope, ordering, pagination, and the permission requirement, with no redundant or filler wording.

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 an output schema present, return values needn't be explained, and the description still notes access counts and ordering. The permission requirement and pagination are covered; only the lack of routing guidance to sibling listing tools leaves a minor gap.

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% for the single 'cursor' parameter, but the description compensates by naming it as a pagination cursor ('with cursor pagination'), which is the key semantic an agent needs. It stops short of stating opacity, expiry, or how to obtain the next cursor.

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 a specific verb and resource ('List active direct URLs') plus scope details (active only, newest first). An agent can distinguish this from list_shares or list_files by the 'direct URLs' framing, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as list_shares or list_files for broader listings. The only contextual note is the 'Requires shares:read' permission, which is a prerequisite rather than usage guidance.

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