download_dataset

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

The description discloses key behaviors: streaming directly to disk, returning SHA-256, and refusal to overwrite unless specified. Since no annotations are provided, this covers the main safety and operational traits.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the action and then adding key behavioral details without 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?

Given the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description covers the main purpose and key behaviors. It lacks information about error handling, retry behavior, or what the SHA-256 is computed over, but is still fairly complete for a download tool.

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 description coverage, the description adds some meaning but insufficiently. It implies 'key' is an identifier and mentions 'overwrite', but does not explain the format or constraints for 'key' and 'dest_path'.

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 'Download a Codabench dataset/bundle to a local absolute path', specifying the action and resource. However, it does not clarify what the 'key' parameter represents exactly, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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 context about the overwrite behavior but does not offer explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other Codabench tools like 'get_task' or 'get_competition') or when not to use it.

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