os_downloads_prepare_export

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns 'inline or resource delivery metadata', which hints at the output nature but doesn't explain side effects, prerequisites, or what 'prepare' entails (e.g., that it doesn't actually perform the export). It doesn't contradict annotations, but it adds limited behavioral 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 a single concise sentence and front-loads the verb 'prepare'. It is not bloated, but it's also too terse to convey meaningful guidance. The structure is acceptable, but the content is so sparse that the sentence doesn't earn its place.

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 the tool has 5 parameters (1 required), an output schema, and many siblings in the os_downloads_* family, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the workflow (e.g., prepare then get_export), the meaning of 'delivery metadata', or parameter semantics. The agent cannot reliably decide when or how to call this tool based on the description alone.

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%, and the description provides no parameter information. It fails to explain productId, delivery, inlineMaxBytes, or filenameContains. With all parameters undocumented, the agent has no guidance on how to populate them, making correct invocation nearly impossible without external knowledge.

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 action ('prepare') and resource ('OS downloads export payload') and mentions the output (delivery metadata). It implies a setup role distinct from actually fetching an export, but it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like os_downloads_get_export. The verb 'prepare' and the mention of 'metadata' give a clear enough purpose, though a direct sibling reference would strengthen it.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that it should precede os_downloads_get_export or that it returns metadata rather than the export itself. Without explicit 'use this when...' or 'instead of...' statements, the agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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