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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real behavioral context: one file per call, a 3 MB size ceiling, PDF output, and the creator/admin access requirement. Minor inconsistency: it asserts file_id is required while the schema's required list contains only offer_id.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and cardinality limit, then provenance, then the escape hatch for large/bulk cases, then the access gate. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a read-only download tool with no output schema and only three parameters, the description covers output format, per-call scope, size limit, ID provenance, alternative path, and auth. The remaining gap is request_id semantics and behavior on an invalid file_id.

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 carry the load. It documents file_id well (required, and where to obtain it) and implies offer_id via 'of an offer', but request_id is never explained and the file_id required claim conflicts with the schema's required array.

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+format: download one signed file of an offer as a PDF. It also names the sibling that produces the IDs (`yardstick_offers_signed_files_list`), so an agent can distinguish it from the list/copy siblings without opening a schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use and alternatives: get IDs from `yardstick_offers_signed_files_list`, and for larger files or bulk saving use the CLI `yardstick offers signed-files download`. The access prerequisite (creator or admin) is also stated, leaving nothing to inference.

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