download_resource

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It states it downloads to disk but does not mention side effects like file overwriting, where the file is saved, whether subdirectories are created, or what the return value is. This leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's behavior beyond the basic action.

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 a single sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose without any waste. It is front-loaded with the key verb and object. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The tool operates in a broader context (browser automation, resource extraction) but the description offers no context or usage conditions. There is no output schema, and the description doesn't mention what the tool returns or how it integrates with sibling tools. Despite good parameter schema, the overall description is too sparse for an agent to confidently use it in the right scenarios.

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% with clear descriptions for all three parameters (url, filename, className). The description itself adds no parameter detail, but the baseline is 3 given high schema coverage. It doesn't go beyond the schema, nor does it need to.

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 uses a specific verb ('Download') and resource ('specific resource file to disk'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like extract_resources which likely handle extraction rather than downloading. It states the action and destination precisely.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, context (e.g., after extract_resources), or scenarios where it should be avoided. The sibling list includes several related tools but the description offers no differentiation or usage hints.

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