download_apple_design_resource

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false; the description adds real substance: the payload is written into a local MCP cache, the return is MCP resource links, and non-Apple-hosted links are metadata-only rather than authenticated downloads. It does not contradict the annotation and clarifies mutation side effects the annotation alone would not.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the download action and destination, then the exception case. No filler; could be marginally richer on invocation choices but no waste.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by stating the return is MCP resource links. Combined with a fully documented schema and the cache-write disclosure, an agent has enough to call it correctly; the only thin spot is tool-selection guidance.

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 100%, so allowed hosts, size limits/defaults, and the resourceId origin are already documented. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond noting that selected resources come via list_apple_design_resources, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb (download), resource (Apple Design resource), destination (local MCP cache), and return shape (MCP resource links). It is distinguishable from list_apple_design_resources and the various content-fetching siblings, though it never names an alternative in prose.

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?

Gives a useful scope limit — external Figma/Sketch web and sketch:// links are only reported as metadata and are not downloaded — which functions as a when-not condition. However, it offers no explicit guidance on when to call this versus list_apple_design_resources or the content tools, leaving selection to inference.

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