ezd_addin_get_attachment_for_print

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation, and the description adds little behavioral context beyond that. It does not disclose output format, token requirements beyond the schema, or any side effects, and it relies almost entirely on the annotation for safety understanding.

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 is a single compact sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse, though it lacks any structural breakdown such as usage context or workflow hints; still, it earns high marks for brevity.

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 tool with no output schema and a required authorization token, the description omits important operational context. It does not explain what the tool returns, how the PrintToken should be obtained, or that this tool is part of a multi-step printing flow together with related Addin tools.

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%, with each parameter having a meaningful Polish description. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level detail, so the schema carries the full burden, which aligns with the baseline of 3.

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 action ('Pobierz' / download), the resource (attachment for printing), and the system context (EZD PUW via Addin). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like ezd_addin_get_doc_ids_for_print or ezd_addin_create_print_token, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that a PrintToken must first be created via ezd_addin_create_print_token, nor how it relates to ezd_addin_get_doc_ids_for_print, leaving the agent to infer the workflow.

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