get_attachment_metadata

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

Description implies read-only retrieval but provides no further behavioral details (e.g., error handling, authorization needs, side effects). With no annotations, description should be more informative.

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?

Very concise with clear argument list. However, lacks additional structure like examples or notes, which would improve usability without much length.

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 output schema exists, description need not detail return values. Tool is simple (3 scalar params). Completeness is adequate but minimal; more context about return type would help.

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?

Description merely repeats parameter names from schema without adding format constraints, examples, or clarifying distinctions (e.g., project_key vs repo_slug format). Schema coverage is 0%, so description should compensate but fails.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves metadata of an attachment, using specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like get_attachment (likely file content) and save_attachment_metadata.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_attachment or save_attachment_metadata. Does not mention prerequisites or context.

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