download_data_library

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it's a background, resumable download, extracts tar.gz files, reports multi-GB transfer progress via job_status, and runs on the machine hosting the MCP server. These are critical behavioral traits. It omits permission or storage requirements but covers the key operational details.

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 tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the core action and constraints. No filler, highly efficient.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, with six parameters at 0% schema coverage, the description omits crucial details for dest, extract, filename, and force_reextract. It covers the high-level behavior and name/url parameters well but is incomplete for safe, correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly explains the name and url parameters and clarifies how to obtain the name. It does not address dest, extract, filename, or force_reextract, leaving half the parameters undocumented. Baseline of 3 is appropriate for partial parameter guidance.

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 (download) and resource (Serpent data library) with explicit scope. It distinguishes itself from the sibling list_data_libraries by noting that the name parameter should come from that list.

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?

Clear context: use name from list_data_libraries or an explicit url. Does not state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives for verification, but provides sufficient routing guidance for this download tool.

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