Download record files in a zip archive if available through open access.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| work_id | Yes | ||
| filename | No | ||
| output_path | No | / |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the zip archive output but does not explain what happens if files are not open access, whether the tool fails gracefully, or any side effects like file creation at output_path. This is a significant gap for a download operation.
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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action and key condition. There is no redundant information, and 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?
Given the tool complexity (3 parameters, no annotations) and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not address error handling, output details beyond the zip archive, or the role of output_path. An output schema exists but is not provided, so the description must stand alone and falls short.
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 compensate for parameter documentation. It does not explain the purpose of work_id, filename, or output_path. While 'record files' loosely ties to work_id, without explicit parameter details, an agent cannot correctly invoke the tool.
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 the tool downloads record files as a zip archive, with a specific condition (open access). The verb 'Download' and resource 'record files' are explicit, and the action is distinct from sibling tools like upload_file or search_records.
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 description implies usage when needing to download record files, and the 'if available through open access' condition provides context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, such as when files are restricted or when using upload_file for the inverse operation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource-action pair (create/get/update/search for communities and records, plus upload/download for files). No two tools have overlapping purposes; even get_record_details and download_files are clearly separated by metadata vs file retrieval.
All tools follow a consistent 'Compoid_<verb>_<noun>' pattern in snake_case, e.g., create_community, get_record_details, search_records. The prefix and verb-noun structure are uniform across the entire set, making the naming predictable.
With 10 tools, the server is well-scoped for managing two core resources (communities and records) plus file operations. Each tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy, and the count feels appropriate rather than bloated or thin.
The server provides create, read, update, and search for both communities and records, along with upload and download for files. The only notable gap is the absence of delete operations for either resource, but the core lifecycle (search, create, retrieve, update) is well covered.