Download a redacted PDF

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses the status gate, retention semantics ('ephemeral' means the original is already gone; output kept for the account's retention window, 14 days by default), and mode-dependent return content (document_text, document_text_path, tag -> original table). That is exactly the operational context an agent needs before calling.

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?

It is front-loaded with the core action and precondition, then layers on retention and pseudonymize details. The third sentence is dense but each clause carries distinct information; only the parenthetical about redact_pdf_and_wait feels slightly appended.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by explaining what the result contains in pseudonymize mode and how long files persist. Combined with the status prerequisite, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly and interpret the response.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema, and output_path receives no discussion in the description. The description does add provenance for document_id, but that only matches rather than exceeds the schema's own wording.

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 verb and resource ('Download the finished redacted PDF for one document') and pins down the identifier source ('using the document id from redact_pdf or get_job_status'). This clearly separates it from siblings like download_correspondence and redact_pdf_and_wait.

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 gives an explicit precondition ('Only works once that document reports status "redacted"') and names an alternative with its purpose ('download_correspondence ... redact_pdf_and_wait fetches both for you'). When-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are both spelled out.

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