profilarr_download_backup

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful behavioral details beyond that: sanitization on the fly, writing to PROFILARR_TEMP_DIR or system temp, and returning {path, filename, size}. This enriches the agent's understanding of side effects and output.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, then the output contract. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers the core behavior, return format, and temp location, which is sufficient for a simple download tool. It lacks explicit error handling or parameter format, but the presence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation still makes it reasonably complete.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the required 'filename' parameter. The name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the tool would benefit from clarifying whether it's the backup name from list_backups or a specific format. The description does not compensate for the lack of schema 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 tool downloads a backup archive, sanitizes it, and writes it to a temporary directory, with a specific return format. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_backups, create_backup, delete_backup, and upload_backup.

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?

The context is clear: use when you need to retrieve a backup file locally. It doesn't explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the action is unambiguous and aligns with the tool's name and siblings.

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