inforcer_reports_download_output

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces that with 'Read-only.' It goes beyond annotations by specifying the return behavior: base64-encoded file content, filename, and content type, plus the constraint that only finished report outputs are downloadable.

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 with no wasted words. The first sentence states the tool's purpose and discovery path; the second describes the response shape. It is efficiently front-loaded.

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?

For a simple two-parameter, read-only retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned and how outputs are discovered. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% parameter coverage, including output_id's provenance from inforcer_reports_run_status's outputs list. The description adds the 'finished' qualifier but does not contribute substantially new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema 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 a specific action ('download') and a specific resource ('a single finished report output'), and further clarifies that outputs are discovered via inforcer_reports_run_status. This clearly separates it from report running, listing, and status-checking siblings.

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 workflow context: use this after discovering outputs through inforcer_reports_run_status. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or name alternative tools, but the discovery source provides enough routing guidance.

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