get_download_path_info

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

No annotations are supplied, but the tool is a zero-argument read, so the behavioral surface is small and 'get the current default' implies a non-mutating read. The description does not say what is returned when no custom path is configured (e.g. an OS default), which is the one behavioral detail an agent might need.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and scope are stated immediately with nothing extraneous.

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?

With zero parameters and an output schema covering the return value, the description is nearly complete. The only missing element is the fallback behavior when no download path has been set, a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 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?

The description gives a specific verb+resource pair (get + current default download path) scoped to Canvas files, which cleanly contrasts with the sibling set_download_path. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the pairing from the get/set naming.

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?

Usage is only implied: the get/set naming against the sibling set_download_path makes the intent reasonably obvious, but there is no statement of when to call this versus set_download_path or any prerequisite conditions.

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