Get Attachment

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that it returns base64-encoded file content, which is useful beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose potential file size limits or error scenarios.

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?

The description is exceptionally concise, consisting of three short sentences with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the core action and return format.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema, rich annotations), the description covers the essential function and return format. It could be slightly improved by mentioning typical use cases, but overall it is adequate.

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?

The input schema provides full coverage (100%) with a description for the 'id' parameter. The description repeats this without adding new meaning, such as how to obtain the attachment ID or the exact expected format.

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 clearly states 'Downloads raw attachment file bytes from Machship by attachment ID', specifying the verb (downloads), resource (attachment file bytes), and method (by ID). It distinguishes from siblings like get_attachments_by_consignment_ids and get_consignment_attachments by focusing on a single attachment download, but lacks explicit differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_attachments_by_consignment_ids or get_consignment_attachments. There are no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite clarifications.

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