ic_download_document

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

The description discloses a specific failure mode: 'Returns FeatureDisabled if the district has the module turned off.' With destructiveHint=true already present, the description adds useful error-condition context beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 sentences, each earning its place: the action is front-loaded, documentId provenance is clarified, and a relevant error is disclosed. No filler or redundant restatement.

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 side-effecting tool with destructiveHint=true and no output schema, the description covers the main action and one notable error but leaves overwrite semantics and district selection implicit. This is functional but has clear gaps an agent would need to resolve.

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 50%, so the description must compensate for under-documented parameters. It clarifies documentId's provenance, but district and overwrite receive no additional semantic guidance beyond their bare schema types.

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?

States a specific action ('Download'), a specific resource ('a student's document (PDF)'), and a target ('to disk'). It further ties documentId to ic_list_documents, making the tool's role distinct from the list-oriented siblings.

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 clearly implies this is the follow-up to ic_list_documents by explaining that documentId comes from that tool's url field. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the workflow context is clear.

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