render_download

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it usefully discloses the default output directory and the blocking wait semantics of wait_seconds, which are non-obvious. However it omits what happens on timeout or failed jobs, overwrite behavior for an existing out_dir, and any permission/auth requirements.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and output artifacts, then parameter behavior and the return value. No filler or redundancy.

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 3-parameter download tool with an output schema already covering return values, the description supplies the essential defaults and wait semantics. It stops short of covering failure/timeout or overwrite edge cases, but those are secondary given the low complexity.

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, and it does: it explains out_dir's default (~/janction-render/<job_id>) and the conditional semantics of wait_seconds (>0 waits up to that long). job_id is only implicitly explained as the target job, leaving minor room for improvement.

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?

States a precise verb+resource ('Download a JANCTION render job's files') and enumerates the concrete artifacts returned (PNG frames, sheet.png, output.mp4), so the agent can distinguish it from siblings like render_status, render_cancel, or render_final without opening a schema.

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 (download a finished job's outputs) and the wait_seconds behavior hints at post-render retrieval, but the description never states when to prefer this over render_status or render_info, nor any prerequisite like the job existing or being complete.

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