Descargar PDF firmado

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool downloads a stamped PDF and requires document visibility, but does not disclose error behavior, authentication needs, or whether the PDF is returned as binary or a URL.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant information.

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 simple download tool with one parameter, the description covers purpose and access condition. It does not mention output format (e.g., binary PDF) or error cases, but these are minor given the tool's simplicity and the presence of a sibling for comparison.

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%, yet the description offers no explanation for the 'signatureId' parameter. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description should clarify that it is the ID of the signature to download.

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 it downloads the stamped PDF of a signature ("Descarga el PDF estampado de una firma"). It distinguishes from the sibling kairo_download_document by specifying that it includes studio signatures and requires document visibility.

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 provides a usage condition: "Podés acceder si ves el documento" (you can access if you see the document). This implies permission requirements but does not explicitly exclude cases or compare to alternatives like kairo_download_document.

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