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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and delivers: it returns size, sha256 and a short-lived download URL, the URL needs no other credential, activation is via curl, and crucially 'the file itself never comes back in the tool result'. That last point prevents a wrong assumption about the return payload.

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?

Front-loads the one-line purpose, then the loop, then return shape, then the constraint. Dense and em-dash-heavy but every sentence adds distinct, load-bearing information.

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, so the description must explain the return value — and it does (size, sha256, short-lived URL, file not inline). Combined with the chaining loop and the connected-base restriction, an agent has everything needed to invoke and use the result.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: 'name' is copied verbatim from the note's assets, 'note_path' is exactly as passed to federated_note_html, and kb_id must lack '/'. These tie parameters to the calling loop rather than restating types.

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 one attachment of a remote note') and immediately disambiguates it from text siblings with 'a file, not text'. An agent can distinguish it from federated_note_html without opening schemas.

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 an explicit canonical loop chaining federated_note_html into per-asset calls, and states a hard precondition ('Only a directly connected base: kb_id without /'). The when-to-use and how-to-sequence are spelled out.

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