Download link

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the account-tier prerequisite, which is genuine behavioral context an agent needs before calling. It does not mention rate limits or link validity, keeping it short of 5.

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 tight sentences with zero waste, front-loading the core action and putting the conditional requirement second. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say more about what is returned (a URL, a temporary link, expiry behavior). It covers the auth prerequisite but leaves the return value and the meaning of the two calling paths (Premium vs nxm link) under-explained.

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 60%; nxm_key and expires are already described in the schema, and the description largely repeats their nxm:// origin. game_domain_name and its default are left entirely to the schema. The description adds only marginal meaning beyond structured fields, so baseline 3 fits.

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 specific verb+resource ('Generate a download link for a file') that no sibling tool covers — the other file-related siblings (nexus_get_mod_files, nexus_rename_mod_file) list or modify files rather than produce download URLs. An agent can identify the tool's function without opening the 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?

Gives a clear usage condition: Premium account is required unless nxm_key/expires from an nxm:// link are supplied. This tells the agent when the call can succeed, but it never names alternatives or states when not to use this tool.

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