canvas_download_file

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds valuable specifics: the URL host restriction, the required destination directory, and the relative path resolution. These details go beyond annotations and clarify the tool's side effects and constraints.

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?

Two efficient sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by constraints. No wasted words; every clause adds necessary 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?

The description covers the main constraints and path resolution, but it omits the behavior of the 'overwrite' parameter (e.g., what happens if the file exists). For a tool with no output schema and a potentially destructive operation, this is a notable gap. Otherwise, it is largely complete.

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 67% with descriptions for url and destinationPath, both of which are also echoed in the description. The description adds little new semantic value for those two parameters. The 'overwrite' parameter is completely undocumented in both the schema and the description, so the description fails to compensate for that missing parameter. At moderate coverage, this is a reasonable baseline.

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 'Download a Canvas file to disk' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (all list/get operations) by being the only download action, and it references canvas_list_course_files as the source, providing immediate differentiation.

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?

It explicitly states that the url must come from canvas_list_course_files and be on the configured host, and that destinationPath must be inside the download directory. These are concrete usage constraints, and since no alternative download tool exists, this fully guides when to use it.

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