Get Attachments by Consignment IDs

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read operation (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint false, idempotent). The description adds valuable behavioral context: the zip return format and the bulk nature (up to 40 IDs). This 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?

The description is extremely concise with two sentences, front-loading the key action and output format. Every word is informative with no fluff.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema and thorough annotations, the description provides sufficient context: what it does (download attachments), scope (up to 40 consignments), format (zip). No additional information is needed.

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 schema description fully covers the parameter, and the description only repeats the same information (array of IDs, max 40). No additional semantic meaning is added beyond the schema.

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 it downloads attachments for multiple consignments (up to 40) and returns a zip. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like machship_get_attachment (single) and machship_get_consignment_attachments (per consignment).

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 bulk attachment downloads but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it. The parameter limit is noted, but no direct comparison with siblings.

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