Inspect downloads

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: completed results include an owned local path, pending is not completed, failed downloads set isError, and files persist after session close. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Four compact sentences deliver all essential behavior with no repetition or filler. The main listing action is front-loaded, and each following sentence adds distinct information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining what results look like. It covers completion, pending, failure, artifact paths, and file persistence. It could be slightly more explicit about the exact status representation, but an agent can reasonably invoke the tool correctly with this information.

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 only 33%, so the description must compensate for download_id and timeout_ms. It does: 'Supply download_id to wait up to timeout_ms for completion' explains both parameters' roles. It does not mention defaults or whether timeout_ms is ignored without download_id, but the core semantics are covered.

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?

Description states a specific action ('List downloads created by this session') and supports optional waiting on a particular download. It clearly identifies the resource and scope, and no sibling tool overlaps with this purpose.

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 gives clear invocation context: omit download_id to list, supply download_id to wait up to timeout_ms. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling appears to compete, so the guidance is sufficient.

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