appwrite_get_file_url

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the critical public bucket requirement but fails to describe authentication needs, URL expiration behavior, what happens when files don't exist, or the return value structure (string vs object).

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 brief at one sentence, but the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be implementation metadata that adds no value for an AI agent. The core message is front-loaded but too terse given the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 tool with 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks parameter documentation, return value specification, and error handling context that would be necessary for correct invocation without trial and error.

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 0% and the description compensates with nothing. None of the four parameters (site, bucket_id, file_id, url_type) are mentioned or explained, including the url_type parameter which has a default value of 'view' that is completely undocumented.

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 'Get[s] the public URL for a file' with a specific verb and resource. However, it fails to distinguish from siblings like appwrite_get_file (likely metadata) or appwrite_download_file (content retrieval), leaving ambiguity about whether this returns a string URL, an object, or initiates a redirect.

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 mentions '(if bucket is public)' implying a constraint, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like appwrite_download_file or appwrite_get_file_view, nor what to do if the bucket is private. No prerequisites or error conditions are documented.

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