akb_get_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates this is a 'download' operation, which is essentially a read from vault but involves writing to a local path. It does not mention required permissions, potential side effects (e.g., overwriting), error handling, or file size limits. The description is adequate but lacks important behavioral details.

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 consists of two short sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the primary action and resource, and the second provides a concrete example of the URI format. Every sentence adds value.

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 that there is no output schema, the description does not explain return values. With two parameters fully covered in the schema and the context of URI source provided, the description is mostly complete for a simple download tool. However, it could mention behavior on existing files (e.g., whether save_to path overwrites without warning) and any success/failure indicators.

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?

Both parameters are already well-described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds context by specifying that the URI comes from akb_browse or akb_put_file, which provides useful guidance beyond what the schema offers. However, it does not add further meaning to the parameters themselves.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Download' and the resource 'file from vault storage to a local path'. It also specifies the URI format and hints at the source (from akb_browse or akb_put_file), distinguishing it from siblings like akb_delete_file (delete) and akb_put_file (upload).

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 clearly states when to use this tool (to download a file) and provides the URI format, as well as where to obtain the URI (from akb_browse or akb_put_file). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives (e.g., other retrieval methods).

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