Convert a file

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (not read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds account/quota context ('Runs against your account and counts toward your quota'), which is real value beyond structured fields. It does not say whether conversion is synchronous or must be polled via the sibling get_job, which is a notable omission for this kind of tool.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what it does and what it returns, followed by input selection and the list_options prerequisite. No filler sentences and no repetition of the name or title.

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 six-parameter tool with no output schema, it covers the return value (download link), auth/quota impact, and the key input decision. The remaining gap is the processing model — nothing says whether the result is immediate or requires polling get_job, which matters given that sibling exists.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by explaining the trade-off between source_url and import_id and their origin (create_upload), and by warning that option names differ per conversion and must come from list_options rather than being guessed.

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 and resource ('Convert a file to another format') plus the outcome ('return a download link'). It also distinguishes its inputs from the sibling create_upload and points to list_options, so an agent can place it among siblings without opening any 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use source_url when the file is already reachable, use import_id for a file on a device, and call list_options first to get exact option names. Both branches and the prerequisite call are stated, not implied.

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