Download Files/Directory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Never overwrites local files; on conflict, you must choose a new local directory,' which is a meaningful and non-obvious side-effect. It does not cover all aspects, but the key safety trait is disclosed.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the core action, the second provides a critical conflict-handling rule. There is no filler or redundant 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?

The tool has moderate complexity with 3 required parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description covers the essential download behavior and conflict rule, but it omits sync/async distinction, success/error behavior, and prerequisites, making it incomplete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds some meaning by indicating remotePath can be a file or directory and localPath is a local directory. However, it does not define the machine parameter or provide explicit path format expectations, leaving gaps.

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 clearly states the tool downloads a file or directory from a remote machine, which is a specific verb + resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from the download-async sibling, but it communicates the core action and direction well.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like download-async or upload. The note about not overwriting local files is a behavioral safety rule, not usage-selection guidance.

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