Скачать бинарь из поля

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds that data can be saved to a path or returned as size, which is useful but lacks details about error handling or response format.

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?

Very concise two-sentence description with front-loaded purpose. Every word adds value without redundancy.

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?

Covers the basic download operation and conditional return of size, but omits details like what the size value represents, error conditions, and output schema (none provided). Given the complexity of the tool (4 parameters, no output schema), more context would be beneficial.

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 has 0% coverage (no descriptions). The description explains the role of collection, id, field via the path pattern, and mentions save_path as optional. However, it does not elaborate on allowed formats or constraints for parameters.

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 it downloads binary data from a field using a specific path pattern. It distinguishes the tool from general file downloads (bpm_download_file) but does not explicitly contrast with siblings like bpm_field_upload.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as bpm_download_file or bpm_get_record. The description only explains the operation itself without context for selection.

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