appwrite_download_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully discloses the base64 output format, but lacks information on size limits, error handling (e.g., file not found), whether this operation is idempotent/read-only, or authentication requirements.

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?

Extremely brief (two sentences), but opens with '[UNIFIED]' which appears to be metadata leakage or categorization noise rather than useful descriptive content. Otherwise efficient with no filler beyond the prefix.

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?

Adequate for a simple retrieval operation but misses key details: no parameter semantics (0% schema coverage), no error behavior documentation, and no output schema. The base64 disclosure is the only completeness saving grace for an otherwise undocumented 3-parameter tool.

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 0% with no descriptions for site, bucket_id, or file_id. The description fails to compensate by explaining what 'site' refers to (Appwrite project/site ID), or clarifying that bucket_id and file_id identify the storage location. Parameter names are somewhat descriptive but insufficient for a 3-param tool with zero schema documentation.

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?

Clearly states the action (download) and resource (file content) and distinguishes from siblings like appwrite_get_file by specifying 'Returns base64 encoded data.' The '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata noise but doesn't obscure the core 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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus sibling tools like appwrite_get_file_url, appwrite_get_file_preview, or appwrite_get_file. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing read permissions) or when to prefer streaming vs base64.

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