download_innerspace_asset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a meaningful behavioral trait — it raises ValueError when the cloud API is disabled or any identifier is empty — but says nothing about permissions, reversibility (implied read-only), or the download result beyond noting an output schema exists.

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 docstring-style Args/Raises layout is reasonably front-loaded and mostly informative, but the 'settings: Application settings' line is wasted space referring to a parameter that does not exist, and the heavy reST backticks add noise for no semantic gain.

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 not be explained, and error behavior is covered. However, with 4 parameters at 25% schema coverage and one argument misnamed, the definition is only marginally complete for an agent to invoke it confidently.

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 only 25% (only 'controller' is described), so the description must compensate. It documents console_id, plan_id, and filename with sources, which is helpful, but it lists a phantom 'settings' argument that is not in the schema and leaves the real 'controller' parameter unaddressed, creating confusion.

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 and resource: 'Download an asset (e.g. floor plan image) from InnerSpace.' An agent can identify it as a read/download operation on InnerSpace assets. Sibling differentiation is only implicit (no other download tool, but no explicit routing to list_innerspace_floor_plans).

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated. The Args block hints at the prerequisite source for console_id ('from list_hosts'), which is a useful dependency signal, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or alternative-tool guidance.

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