zhiqi_collab_download

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses two important traits: the server enforces a mandatory visibility check, and the downloaded content is marked UNTRUSTED. This goes beyond the bare action and gives the agent meaningful security-related context.

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 plus a short parenthetical and warning. Every phrase contributes useful information, and the primary action is front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description should also explain return values, failure modes, and side effects. It only mentions visibility validation and untrusted content, leaving the agent to guess what the tool returns after a successful download and how authorization failures surface.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description maps artifactId to '交付物' and outPath to '本机路径', adding some semantic meaning beyond the raw parameter names. It still leaves out path format, artifact selection detail, and overwrite or file-creation behavior.

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?

States a specific action (download deliverable) and destination (local path), clearly identifying the tool's core function. The added server-side visibility validation helps narrow scope, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as zhiqi_collab_deliver.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb '下载交付物到本机路径' — an agent can infer that this is the tool for saving deliverables locally. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no prerequisite conditions beyond the visibility-check hint.

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