consent_pdf_bytes

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 discloses the output format (Base64) and the prerequisite (jid from consent_search). However, it does not describe authentication behavior, idempotency, or error handling for invalid jid—minimal but not misleading.

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, focused sentences: the first states the tool's purpose, the second gives a prerequisite. There is no redundancy or extraneous information.

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 there is no output schema, the description does state the output type (Base64 PDF) and includes a necessary prerequisite. However, it omits descriptions for two of three parameters and does not cover potential errors or output usage. For a simple download tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 0%, and the description only explains 'jid' (as obtained from consent_search). The parameters 'eip_id' and 'eip_password' are not described at all, leaving their purpose and format unexplained. The description adds very little semantic value beyond the bare parameter names.

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 states '下載同意書 PDF (Base64)' which clearly identifies the action (download) and the resource (consent PDF in Base64 format). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like consent_search which is a prerequisite search, and consent_list which likely lists consents.

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 explicitly states '需先用 consent_search 取得 jid' (need to first use consent_search to get jid), providing a clear prerequisite and directing the agent to a specific sibling tool. It doesn't mention when not to use, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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