download_contract_document_file_revision

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only paraphrases the tool name ('Download a file revision'), offering no details about the response format (e.g., binary content), whether this is a read-only operation, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 short but essentially restates the tool name without adding new information. It fails to earn its place because it provides no elaboration or context, making it under-specified rather than concise in a valuable way.

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?

This is a download operation with no output schema and no annotations, yet the description does not explain what the tool returns, how the file is delivered, or how it differs from related tools. The description is far too minimal for an agent to confidently invoke this tool 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 schema provides descriptions for all three parameters ('Contract ID', 'Document ID', 'File revision ID'), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 clearly states the action ('Download') and the resource ('a file revision for a contract document'), using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish this tool from its sibling 'get_contract_document_file_revision', which likely serves a similar retrieval 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_contract_document_file_revision' or 'list_contract_document_file_revisions'. The description lacks context about the difference between downloading a file revision and getting revision metadata.

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