download_unit_document

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only mentions 'Download' and the file types. There is no mention of permissions, return format, or error handling, leaving a significant transparency gap.

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 sentences: the first states the function, the second gives usage rationale. No extra words, front-loaded and efficient.

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 simple 2-parameter download tool, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: 'trail document' is unclear, the return payload is not described, and there's no link to sibling tools like list_unit_documents or get_file.

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?

The schema provides only names and UUID formats, and the description adds no explanation of what docId or unitId refer to. The phrase 'one trail document' hints at docId but does not clarify the role of unitId, and schema coverage is 0%.

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 the tool downloads one trail document (PDF/ODT), using a specific verb and resource type. It also distinguishes it from re-attaching files, which separates it from upload-related siblings, though 'trail' is ambiguous.

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?

It explicitly says to use this instead of asking the user to re-attach HV or heating files, which is a clear when-to-use scenario. It doesn't list alternatives or exclusions for other document types, but the context is clear enough.

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