edit_download

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

Annotations already declare non-readonly, idempotent, and destructive. The description adds genuinely new context: the Task API v2 requirement and the fact that older versions return a clear error. That version/error behavior goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 tight sentences with no filler, front-loading the core action before the task_ids and destination detail and closing with the version caveat. Every sentence earns 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers both parameters plus a critical version requirement. It lacks any permissions note or explicit sibling routing, but is otherwise complete for this small tool.

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%, so the description must carry the load, and it does for both parameters: it clarifies task_ids is a list and that destination changes the output share. With only two params this compensates well, though it doesn't state accepted destination values or whether destination is optional.

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 verb+resource ('Edit task parameters') and names the concrete field it can modify ('destination' changes the task's output share). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings like set_download_config or set_schedule.

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?

Usage is implied ('edit task parameters') and the version prerequisite (newer Download Station / Task API v2) is stated, which is a real usage condition. However, it never says when to pick this over set_download_config or other edit tools, so the guidance is only implicit.

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