Download data

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly states the operation returns a string and is limited to raw text, and the usage guidance prevents misuse. It does not go into edge-case behavior, but for a simple read-like tool this is sufficient.

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?

Every sentence contributes: purpose, when-to-use, when-not-to-use, and the fallback alternative are all packed into a compact description. The critical routing information is front-loaded.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema and full parameter coverage, the description is complete: it defines what is returned, exactly when to call it, and which sibling to choose instead. Nothing needed for correct selection and invocation is missing.

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 single parameter has full schema description coverage ('Swarm reference hash'), so the schema already documents it. The description adds context about upload_data-origin references but does not materially enhance the parameter semantics beyond the baseline.

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 names a specific verb ('Download'), a resource ('raw text data from a Swarm reference'), and the result type ('string'), making the tool's purpose explicit. It also implicitly differentiates from download_files by restricting scope to raw text content.

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?

It gives exact conditions for use ('ONLY when the user explicitly asks for text content, string content, or raw data') and explicit exclusions for file/folder requests that route to download_files. It even provides a tie-breaker rule ('When in doubt... prefer download_files'), which is unusually complete guidance.

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