Verzeichnis herunterladen (mit Beweis-Wanderung)

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

Annotations claim readOnlyHint=true, but the tool downloads files, modifying the local filesystem, which is a write operation. This contradiction undermines trust. The description itself partially discloses behavior (downloads and verifies) but omits overwrite behavior and permissions.

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 main action, no wasted text. Efficient and clear.

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?

Covers the basic operation and verification, but lacks details on overwrite behavior, error handling, and prerequisites. Given no output schema, more context on side effects would be helpful.

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 100% and provides descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the verification step and mapping proof parameter to hash/size/none, enhancing understanding beyond schema defaults.

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 remote directory recursively. The verb 'herunterladen' and resource 'Remote-Verzeichnis' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like silicon_download_file (single file) and silicon_upload_dir.

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 description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No explicit when-not-to-use or differentiation from similar tools like silicon_download_file.

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