download_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does substantive work: it defines timeout as covering multiple phases, clarifies subdir semantics, and states that failed files will not become final files. It does not mention auth, overwrite behavior, or partial-file cleanup, but it gives meaningful operational detail.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and returning value, followed by terse clarifications of the non-obvious parameters. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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 description is largely complete for a download tool: it covers return contents, parameter semantics for the unusual fields, timeout scope, and failure behavior. The main gaps are undocumented site values and no explicit routing to sibling tools, but an output schema exists and the core call contract is clear.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds real meaning for subdir and timeout, and post_id is implied by 'by ID', but the required site parameter is left entirely unexplained, leaving an agent to guess at valid values or the role of site in the request.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'download entire work by ID' and names the return value (file list and sidecar). This distinguishes it from siblings like download_url (by URL) and download_search (by search) without requiring the agent to open schemas.

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 implies usage when you have a post ID and want a full download, but it never explicitly says when to prefer this over download_url or download_search, nor gives exclusions. Guidance is implicit rather than stated.

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