fiken_get_offer_draft_attachments

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

The description matches the readOnlyHint annotation, but adds no additional behavioral context beyond what the annotation already provides (e.g., no mention of authentication, rate limits, or what 'attachments' entail).

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it is too brief given the missing parameter guidance.

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 lacks details about the return format, handling of missing drafts, or any usage constraints. For a simple list tool, it is moderately incomplete.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description should explain the 'draftId' parameter, but it does not. The parameter's meaning is only implied by the tool name.

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 verb 'Returns' and the resource 'attachments for an offer draft', distinguishing it from siblings like fiken_get_offer_draft (returns the draft itself) and other attachment retrieval tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., other attachment retrieval tools like fiken_get_invoice_attachments). The description only states the action without context.

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