sac_translation_download_xliff

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action and target but omits details like return format (likely binary), prerequisites (artifact existence), or side effects. There is no contradiction.

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 a single sentence that conveys the essential action and target with zero waste. It is appropriately 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 required param, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks output context and usage guidance. With sibling tools, more completeness would help, but overall it covers basic needs.

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%. The input schema describes 'artifactId' as 'Artifact ID'. The tool description does not add further meaning, but the baseline is 3 per guidelines since the schema already provides basic documentation.

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' and the resource 'XLIFF translation file for an artifact'. It is specific and actionable, but does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling 'sac_translation_download_xliff_bulk' for bulk downloads, which could be inferred from the tool name.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'sac_translation_download_xliff_bulk' for multiple artifacts or 'sac_translation_get_artifact' for artifact details. The agent receives no decision support.

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