download_model

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses automatic download and trusted namespaces, but fails to mention potential side effects like overwriting existing files, network dependency, or blocking behavior. This is adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, input/behavior, security+follow-up. No unnecessary words. Well front-loaded with the main action.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the core aspects: what it does, what it takes, restrictions, and next step. Lacks error handling info, but that is acceptable for such a tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying that the download is automatic and restricted to trusted namespaces, which goes beyond the schema. The example model names and reference to list_models enhance understanding.

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 the verb (download), resource (Whisper model from Hugging Face), and destination (models directory). It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_models and switch_model by specifying its role.

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 provides good usage context: it gives examples of model names, mentions filtering to trusted namespaces, and directs to use switch_model afterwards. It implicitly suggests checking list_models first, but does not explicitly state when not to download.

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