enabiz_download_document

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

Discloses important behaviors beyond annotations: PDF is saved to a specific directory with chmod 600, the content is not passed to the LLM, only metadata is returned, and an error is thrown if no authenticated session exists. This fully addresses the readOnlyHint annotation by clarifying that server data is not modified.

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 well-organized with a clear opening sentence followed by a bulleted list of document types and their parameters. Every sentence earns its place; no fluff.

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 all necessary aspects: document types, parameter mapping, authentication requirement, output format, and file permissions. Despite having 9 parameters and only 1 required, the description makes usage straightforward. Output schema exists, so return values are handled.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds full meaning by mapping each 'kind' value to required and optional parameters (e.g., 'lab' requires card_tarih and kurum_kodu; optional start_year/end_year and dil). This is far beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 states exactly what the tool does: downloads a PDF health document and saves to disk. It lists the supported document types (lab, pathology, discharge, radiology) with their specific parameter requirements, clearly distinguishing this download action from sibling tools that list or retrieve data.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use: to download a PDF. It references sibling list tools for obtaining required parameter values and mentions authentication prerequisites. While it does not explicitly state when not to use, the context is clear enough for an agent.

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