blackboard_download_attachment

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

Description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: files are stored in a 'protected Campus download directory' and 'outputDir may be a relative subdirectory only'. This complements the readOnlyHint=false annotation by specifying the side effect location. It does not mention overwrite behavior or return values, but the key destination constraint is disclosed.

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, front-loaded with the main action, and every word earns its place ('protected Campus download directory' and 'relative subdirectory only' are essential constraints). No verbose or redundant phrasing.

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 5 parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description provides adequate context for invocation: it specifies source, destination, and a key parameter constraint. However, it lacks guidance on when to call this after blackboard_list_attachments and does not mention what the tool returns, leaving minor gaps.

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 covers all 5 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), including details like 'Relative subdirectory inside ~/Downloads/campus-cli'. Description only reiterates the outputDir constraint without adding new semantic information beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a file from a course content item' and destination 'protected Campus download directory'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like blackboard_download_file_url by specifying the source (course content item) and target (protected download directory). Tool name reinforces attachment context.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative tool guidance is provided. The description gives a clear context (downloading from course content) but does not contrast with siblings like blackboard_download_file_url or blackboard_download_feedback_file, leaving selection to the agent's inference from the name and description.

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