gateway_file_download_status

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

readOnlyHint already declares the operation is read-only. The description adds the meaningful behavioral constraint that the session must be owned by the current actor, which is useful scoping beyond the annotation. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The essential information about action, resource, and ownership scope is delivered immediately and economically.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete. The only notable gap is not explicitly connecting download_id to gateway_file_download_create, which would complete the download lifecycle context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should help explain download_id. It partially does by establishing that the ID refers to a file download session, but it does not clarify where the ID comes from or how it should be obtained. The parameter remains self-evident but under-documented.

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 ('Get'), names the exact resource ('file download session'), and adds a scope ('owned by the current actor') that distinguishes it from related file upload/download tools. It clearly identifies what the tool does.

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 implies usage for checking a file download session's status and imposes an ownership restriction, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention the relationship to gateway_file_download_create. The lifecycle context is left to inference.

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