get_asset_download_url

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the need for an authorization header when downloading paid/private assets, which is valuable. However, it does not clarify side effects, whether the tool is read-only, or behavior for free assets. It partially addresses transparency.

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 four sentences with a clear structure: purpose, args, returns, note. It is front-loaded with the main action. Some redundancy exists (e.g., 'download URLs' repeated), but it remains concise enough.

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 simple one-parameter tool without an output schema, the description covers the parameter, return type, and a usage note. It lacks error handling or examples but is reasonably complete for the complexity level.

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?

The input schema has zero description coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining that 'asset_id' can be either 'id' or 'assetBaseId'. This adds essential meaning beyond the schema's type definition.

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 'Get the download URLs for a specific asset by its ID,' specifying the verb 'get' and the resource 'download URLs' for an asset. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'search_blendkit_assets' which is for searching, not retrieving URLs.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., after searching for an asset ID). The description implies usage after obtaining an asset ID but does not state prerequisites or exclude scenarios.

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