ssh_download

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

The description does not contradict the 'openWorldHint' annotation. However, it lacks additional behavioral details such as whether the local file is overwritten, authentication requirements, or error handling. Given the annotation, the burden is lower, but the description could still be more transparent about potential side effects.

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 concise sentences. The first states the primary function, and the second provides crucial usage guidance. No superfluous information is present, achieving both brevity and effectiveness.

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 complexity (3 required parameters, no nested objects, output schema exists), the description covers the main action and usage context adequately. It could be more complete by mentioning overwrite behavior or error scenarios, but it is already sufficient for typical use.

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 described (server_name, remote_path, local_path). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema; it only reinforces the direction of transfer. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Download a file from a remote server to the local machine via SFTP', which clearly identifies the verb (download), resource (file), and method (SFTP). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'scp via ssh_execute' by specifying the direction 'FROM a remote SSH server TO the local machine'.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use this tool (NOT scp via ssh_execute) to transfer files FROM a remote SSH server TO the local machine.' This clearly states when to use this tool and which alternative to avoid, leaving no ambiguity.

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