direct_list_sitelinks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, and 'Read-only' merely restates that. The description adds no behavior beyond the annotations: no pagination semantics, no result-set size behavior, no note on what the limit default of 500 implies.

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?

Three terse fragments are front-loaded and easy to scan, but 'Read-only' is pure repetition of the annotations and the field enumeration duplicates the output schema, so not every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a read-only list tool with rich annotations and an existing output schema, return values and safety need not be explained, so the core is covered. However, two of three parameters and all pagination behavior are left undocumented, which is a real gap for a listing tool that defaults to 500 items.

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%, so the description must carry the parameter burden, yet it only addresses ids ('Optional Ids filter'). limit and offset are never mentioned, so an agent gets no statement about pagination or what the defaults mean.

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 the resource (sitelink sets) and enumerates the returned fields (Id, Title, Href, Description), so an agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It lacks an explicit verb, but the 'direct_list_' prefix plus the field enumeration makes the intent unambiguous and clearly distinct from the other list siblings.

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?

'Optional Ids filter' is the only guidance and it is about a parameter, not about when to choose this tool over alternatives. There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative anywhere in the description.

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