save_attachments

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

The annotations include destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows the tool is non-destructive. The description adds that it returns a list of written file paths. However, it doesn't disclose overwriting behavior or error conditions, but given the annotation coverage, the description is adequate.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage and distinction. Every sentence adds value with no unnecessary words.

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?

The description explains the core function, filters, return value, and when to use the sibling. It doesn't cover edge cases like error handling or file naming conventions, but for a batch download tool with good annotations, it is reasonably complete.

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%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description reinforces the filter parameters but adds minimal new meaning. 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 clearly states the action (save), the resource (all qualifying attachments from an email), and the qualifying conditions (optional filters). It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'save_attachment' by indicating batch vs. single attachment retrieval.

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 tells when to use this tool: 'Use to batch-download attachments from a single email.' It also provides an alternative: 'Prefer save_attachment when you need to save one specific attachment by its attachmentId.' This is clear guidance.

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