download_pdf

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses a security constraint (downloads restricted to the 'downloads' folder and subdirectories), which is important behavioral context for a file-writing tool. It does not mention permissions, rate limits, or failure modes, but the key safety-relevant fact is present.

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 short sentences, no fluff, and the core action plus the security scoping constraint are front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

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. For a 2-param, 1-required tool, the description covers the action and the key constraint. It could be more complete by noting paper_id expectations or the default save directory, but it is sufficient for 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 clarifies that save_dir is a local directory and that downloads are locked to the project's 'downloads' folder, which adds meaning beyond the raw schema prop names. It still doesn't explain paper_id format or that save_dir defaults to 'downloads', but it partially covers the gap.

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 (a paper's PDF) with a clear outcome (to a local directory). Differentiates itself from siblings like get_bibtex or get_paper_fulltext by specifying it's a PDF download rather than metadata or text.

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?

Implies usage (when you need the actual PDF file locally) but does not explicitly state when to choose this over get_paper_fulltext or other retrieval siblings. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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