Download a remote file to local disk (SFTP)

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that response excludes file content and includes byte count, but does not explain overwrite behavior, permission requirements, or error handling. Adequate but with gaps.

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 concise sentences with key information front-loaded. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, many siblings, and no annotations, description lacks parameter guidance, usage context, and comparisons to alternatives. Leaves significant gaps for agent decision-making.

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 has 0% description coverage and description provides no parameter explanations. Parameter names are self-explanatory (localPath, remotePath, connectionName, mkdirParents), but description adds no value beyond naming. Baseline for low coverage is description must compensate; it does not.

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?

Description clearly states the action (download), resource (remote file), method (SFTP), and a key behavioral detail (response contains only byte count, not content). Distinguishes from siblings like read_remote_file.

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 when not to use (when file content is needed) but does not explicitly state when to use vs. alternatives like upload_file or read_remote_file. No guidance on preconditions.

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