notification_document_download_url_create

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

All annotations are false, so the description carries the full burden. It adds the useful trait that the URL is presigned and specifies dependencies, but it doesn't disclose expiration behavior, authentication requirements, or whether the operation has side effects. This is a moderate gap for a tool that creates a time-limited resource.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded and the prerequisite chain is compressed into a clear arrow notation. Every word earns its place.

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 two-parameter tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and usage context. It omits the return format and expiration details, but the tool's simplicity makes the description sufficient for selection and basic invocation.

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 100% and each parameter already explains its origin ('Obtain from notification_request_create' and 'Obtain from notification_document_add'). The description's 'Requires' line essentially repeats this, adding no new semantic value beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Creates') and resource ('presigned download URL for a document attachment on a notification request'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling upload tool by emphasizing 'download'.

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 the required prior calls ('notification_request_create → requestId, notification_document_add → attachmentId'), giving actionable workflow context. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, but the prerequisite chain and download-specific wording are sufficient for typical usage.

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