Download a file

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

Annotations state readOnlyHint=false, so a write operation is expected. The description adds useful behavioral details: it downloads to a default directory (/root/Downloads/ParentSquare), returns the path, and implies a size-based rationale. It does not mention overwrite behavior or side effects beyond disk writes, but the annotations already signal non-read-only, and the description adds context beyond them.

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 primary action and default path, then a concise usage rationale. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior (download to disk, return path) and provides use-case context. It lacks details on error handling or prerequisites (e.g., valid attachment URL), but the schema mentions the URL source, and the tool is simple enough that this is adequate.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds some context about why to use the tool (large files, keeping a copy) which indirectly relates to the 'show' parameter, but it does not add new semantic meaning to the parameters themselves. The schema already describes all parameters accurately.

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 ('ParentSquare attachment') and clearly states the output (path). It distinguishes itself from inline display by noting it's for things too large to inline or for keeping a copy, which differentiates it from sibling tools like get_post or list_files that provide content access.

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 gives clear usage context: 'Use this for things too large to inline, or when you want to keep a copy.' This indicates when to prefer this tool, but it does not explicitly name an alternative tool or provide exclusion criteria, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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