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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full burden. It only mentions extraction and flagging, but does not disclose output format, return structure, edge cases (e.g., relative URLs), or what 'flag' means concretely.

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 a single sentence, no unnecessary words, and immediately communicates the tool's core functionality.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is somewhat adequate but lacks details on output format or behavior (e.g., does it return a list? object? what about duplicates?). More completeness would be beneficial.

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?

The sole parameter 'text' has 0% schema description coverage, but the description adds meaning by stating it is the input from which links are extracted. This clarifies the parameter's role beyond the raw type.

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 clearly states it extracts markdown/bare links and specifically flags javascript: URLs, distinguishing it from sibling tools like extract_urls which likely extract all URLs.

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?

Implied usage for extracting links and flagging javascript: URLs, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus similar siblings like extract_urls or when not to use it.

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