download_document

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: custom parser for markdown, default truncation at 100,000 characters, and handling of large documents. Missing details like error handling or authentication, but overall transparent for a download tool.

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 dense, relevant information. No fluff, front-loaded purpose, every sentence adds value. Ideal conciseness.

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 return formats, custom processing, truncation, and scope. Missing details on error responses or behavior for missing documents, but adequate given the tool's simplicity and full schema coverage.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the custom parser for markdown and the truncation behavior, providing context beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 tool returns disclosure documents in markdown, raw XML, or plain text, and mentions the custom parser and default format. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_periodic_report, which may also return document content.

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?

It says the tool is used for 'all disclosure originals' and lists examples, implying broad usage. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or references to alternatives among siblings, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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