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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive and the description's 'Changes nothing' merely echoes them. What it adds beyond annotations is genuinely valuable: the link is unauthenticated and expires in five minutes, which is security-relevant context an agent could not infer from structured fields.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, then the security caveat, then the parameter note. No filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does explain the return value (a link) and its lifetime, which is the key missing piece. It stops short of covering failure modes, such as when the requested document type has not been uploaded.

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?

With 50% schema description coverage, the description carries part of the load: it clarifies that `kind` selects resume versus cover letter, though that largely restates the enum. It adds no syntax or semantics for application_id beyond what the schema already says.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: returns a download link for the PDF of one application's resume or cover letter. This cleanly separates it from the adjacent get_document/get_application siblings, which fetch content rather than a link, even without naming them.

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?

Explains how to handle the result (give it to the account owner, do not share further), which is useful, but gives no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-get_document guidance or preconditions such as the document needing to exist for that kind.

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