zont_download_archive

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses that it writes a file to disk and depends on a prior generate step, but says nothing about overwrite behavior, permissions, size limits, or failure modes for a local-write operation.

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?

Front-loaded one-line purpose followed by two tight parameter notes; every sentence carries information and nothing is redundant.

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 no explanation, and both parameters plus the upstream dependency are covered. Only minor behavioral details about the local file write are absent.

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 compensate, and it does: it explains archive_id comes from zont_generate_archive and that output_path is the destination file for the zip. Both parameters gain meaning beyond the bare schema titles.

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 (download), a specific resource (the zip archive previously created by zont_generate_archive), and the effect (save to disk). It also clearly distinguishes itself from its sibling zont_generate_archive by naming it as the prerequisite producer.

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 establishes the key precondition: the archive must have already been created by zont_generate_archive, which sequences the workflow correctly. It does not, however, state exclusions or alternatives beyond that dependency.

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