download_base_formulas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable context: tables with no formula fields are silently skipped, outputDir defaults to cwd, and the file format includes a # AT: header with specific fields. This goes beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is three sentences, each adding essential information. It is front-loaded with the core action and output, then details about headers, skipping, and defaults. No redundancy or filler words.

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?

Given 3 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity, the description covers the main behavior, output format, edge cases (silent skip), and defaults. It ensures an agent can invoke the tool correctly without additional information.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the outputDir structure (outputDir/<Table Name>/<Field Name>.formula), that it defaults to cwd when omitted, and that debug includes raw Airtable response. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 'Download ALL formula fields from a base to local .formula files, organized into per-table subfolders.' This specifies the action (download), resource (all formula fields from a base), and output structure, distinguishing it from similar tools like download_formula_field.

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 implicitly explains when to use (when needing all formula fields) by mentioning the silent skip of tables without formula fields, but it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use. Sibling tools like download_formula_field exist for single field downloads, but no guidance is provided.

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