Download Attachment

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

The annotation 'readOnlyHint: true' is complemented by the description explaining the base64 encoding and the size limit behavior. It adds context about the MCP protocol and error handling, fully disclosing behavioral traits beyond annotations.

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 description is concise, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy. It efficiently covers the return format and size constraint.

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?

Given the single parameter, thorough schema documentation, and presence of annotations, the description fully covers the return type, error cases, and usage context. No output schema is needed as the return is clearly described.

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 input schema already provides comprehensive documentation for the single parameter 'attachment_id', including an example and workflow guidance. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb 'Download', the resource 'attachment from Confluence', and the format 'embedded resource' (base64-encoded). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'confluence_download_content_attachments' by focusing on a single attachment.

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?

The description provides a specific constraint for files larger than 50 MB, and guides the user to find attachment IDs via get_attachments. However, it does not explicitly compare with the alternative 'confluence_download_content_attachments' for multiple downloads.

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