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

Annotations already declare this a non-destructive read. The description adds real behavioral detail beyond them: the URL is signed, time-limited, and expires per ttl_seconds. It does not disclose error behavior (e.g. invalid slug) or whether the URL is unauthenticated, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Effectively two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by usage triggers. Dense but each clause earns its place; no filler or repetition.

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 adequately conveys what comes back (a time-limited signed download URL) plus its expiry semantics. It omits failure modes and whether the URL works without auth, which are the only notable gaps.

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 60% schema coverage, the schema already documents account, ttl_seconds, and download_filename. The description restates the ttl default/max but adds no meaning for slug, doc_name, or download_filename beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get a time-limited signed URL that downloads the raw file of any doc') and names the scope ('any doc the user has access to'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_doc_html by noting it applies when the doc isn't HTML.

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?

Gives three concrete triggers: handing the file off to another tool or LLM, the user asking for a download link, or the doc not being HTML. It names the alternative tool (get_doc_html) and the condition under which that alternative is inapplicable, leaving little to inference.

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