moodle_download

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral burden. It discloses the save location and optional subdir, but doesn't state whether it overwrites existing files, how it handles large files, whether authentication is required, or what happens on failure. The 'saved under the download folder' detail is useful but incomplete for a file-writing operation.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the parameter workflow and save location. Nothing is wasted and the essential information comes first.

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 file-download tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description gives the minimum: what it does, the key input source, and the save behavior. It's incomplete regarding authentication, failure modes, overwrite behavior, and the filename parameter, but covers the basic call path.

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 0%, so the description must document all three parameters. It explains fileurl (from moodle_browse) and subdir (optional folder), which is helpful, but it completely omits filename. One of three parameters is undocumented in both schema and description, a significant gap.

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 states a specific verb (Download) and resource (one Moodle file), and it carefully distinguishes itself from sibling moodle_browse by explaining it consumes a fileurl from a browse result. However, it doesn't fully differentiate itself from moodle_sync, which might also retrieve files, leaving a minor ambiguity about when to prefer a direct download over a sync.

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?

It gives clear context: pass the fileurl from a moodle_browse result, and optionally place it in subdir. It doesn't explicitly exclude other usage patterns or mention prerequisites like requiring authentication or an active session, but the workflow guidance is solid and actionable.

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