Anhang speichern

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

With only openWorldHint present and no read-only or destructive annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing side effects. It does explicitly state that the tool saves to the hard disk and defaults to downloadDir, which is meaningful. However, it does not mention file naming, overwrite behavior, or whether saving affects the mail server state.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that immediately state the core behavior and the default destination. There is no filler or redundant wording.

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 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but leaves gaps. It does not mention that omitting index saves all attachments, what the tool returns, or how multiple accounts are handled. The schema fills in parameter details, but the description alone would not fully prepare an agent to invoke the tool confidently.

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 80%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description only adds that targetDir defaults to downloadDir, which is also repeated in the schema, so it contributes no significant semantic value beyond the structured definitions.

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 and resource: 'Speichert einen Anhang einer Nachricht auf der Festplatte.' This clearly identifies it as the save-attachment operation and distinguishes it from the sibling mail tools, none of which write attachments to disk.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as first reading the message with mail_read. The only usage hint appears in the schema's index parameter ('aus mail_read'), not in the description itself.

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