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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that filtering parameters change the return format from a URL to CSV content, which is a meaningful behavioral trait beyond annotations. However, it does not mention URL expiration or auth requirements.

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?

A single well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and appends the conditional mode. Every clause carries information and nothing is wasted.

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 no output schema, the description should explain return values and it does: signed URL vs CSV content. With full annotation coverage and complete schema documentation, the only gap is the absence of details like URL expiration, authentication needs, or pagination for large results.

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%, so all 7 parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds that the boolean filter parameters (role, valid, invalid, etc.) trigger CSV output instead of a signed URL, which is a useful semantic layer not present in the schema. But beyond that mapping, the description does not elaborate on parameter behavior.

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+resource ('Get a signed download URL') with the resource clearly being 'completed results'. It also reveals a second output mode ('or CSV content when filtered or rebuilt from history'), which is genuinely useful. The sibling 'get_verification_history' is related but the description does not explicitly differentiate from it.

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 'when filtered or rebuilt from history' clause implies a conditional context for the CSV mode, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus get_verification_history or get_task_status. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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