extract_links_from_request

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool extracts and analyzes links but omits important details like whether it modifies state, permissions required, error handling, or behavior when the request lacks links. This lack of transparency is a significant gap.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences, no verbose language, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word adds value.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters and no output schema. The description covers the purpose and usage context but does not explain the return structure, error scenarios, or behavior when no links are found. While the tool is simple, these omissions leave some ambiguity.

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%, and the input schema already contains adequate descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description adds no additional semantic information beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Extract and analyze all URLs/links') and the resource ('a captured request'). Specific use cases are listed, making it easy to understand the tool's purpose and distinguish it from siblings like get_latest_request or wait_for_request.

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?

Description explicitly mentions when to use the tool ('finding password reset links, verification tokens, and other sensitive URLs'), providing clear context. However, it does not offer negative guidance or mention alternatives among the long list of sibling tools.

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