download_media

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool writes a local file and returns success status plus a file path, but it does not mention permissions, whether existing files are overwritten, or how failures are surfaced beyond a status flag.

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 first sentence front-loads the action and outcome, and the Args/Returns sections are compact. The formatting is slightly formulaic but no sentence is wasted.

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 two required parameters, no annotations, and an output schema. The description covers purpose, both parameters, and the return shape, which is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly. It lacks only minor operational details like file overwrite behavior or permissions.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents both required parameters with their meaning: message_id identifies the message containing the media, and chat_jid identifies the containing chat. It does not specify JID or message-ID formats, but it covers all 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 states a specific verb (Download) and resource (media from a WhatsApp message) plus the direct outcome (local file path). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like send_file, which moves data in the opposite direction.

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 implied by the action and the WhatsApp-message scope, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as get_message_context or list_messages. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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