Get Consignment Attachments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe, non-destructive operation. The description adds that it returns only metadata, not file contents, which is useful context. However, it does not elaborate on any side effects or limitations beyond what annotations convey.

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: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and immediately clarify that it returns metadata only. No extraneous words or 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 simple read-only metadata retrieval with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter. It could optionally list metadata fields (e.g., filenames, sizes) but is sufficient given annotations and tool simplicity.

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 a 100% covered parameter 'consignmentId' with description 'Consignment ID.' The tool description repeats this information without adding new meaning or constraints. Baseline is 3 for high schema coverage.

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 'Returns attachment metadata (not file contents) for a consignment,' which specifies the verb (returns), resource (attachment metadata), and scope (for a consignment). It distinguishes from sibling tools like machship_get_attachment (which returns file contents) and machship_upload_attachments.

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 hints at usage by noting it returns metadata not file contents, implying that for file contents one should use another tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like machship_get_attachments_by_consignment_ids or machship_get_attachment, leaving room for ambiguity.

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