Download workout file

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a useful context clue about where to obtain file_id, but doesn't elaborate on return format or error scenarios. No contradiction with 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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Every word adds value: the action, the resource, the key parameter, and the source of that parameter.

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 straightforward download tool with 4 parameters and annotations, the description is sufficient. It covers the essential hook (file_id source) and the schema handles parameter details. However, it doesn't mention behavior when output_path is omitted or whether the tool returns a path vs. binary content, which would be useful but not required.

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. The description adds meaningful semantic value by specifying that file_id comes from tp_get_workout and referencing device_files/attachment_files, which helps the agent understand the parameter's origin. This exceeds the baseline.

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 action ('Download'), the resource ('workout file'), and the key identifier ('file_id'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like tp_upload_workout_file and tp_delete_workout_file by focusing on retrieval.

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 clear usage hint: 'Get file_id from tp_get_workout device_files/attachment_files.' This explains a prerequisite and implies when to use this tool (after fetching workout details). It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, 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.