vortex_downloads

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description still adds genuine value by disclosing what the output deliberately omits (signed URLs, filesystem paths), which tells the agent these items must be fetched elsewhere.

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?

A single tight sentence with zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded ahead of the output constraint.

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, so the description carries more return-value burden; saying it lists downloads 'and their state' while omitting URLs/paths partially covers that. It does not address pagination via limit/offset or the gameId filter, leaving notable gaps for a list 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and none of the three parameters (limit, gameId, offset) are explained or even mentioned in the description. gameId in particular is non-obvious filtering behavior that the description leaves undocumented.

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 verb (List) and resource (Vortex downloads) plus the returned state, and implicitly differentiates itself from signed-URL siblings via the negative constraint. It does not name a sibling outright, but an agent can tell this is the read-only listing rather than the link-fetching tool.

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 phrase 'without returning signed URLs' implies this is the alternative to a link-fetching tool such as nexus_download_links, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use condition is stated explicitly. Usage is inferable rather than spelled out.

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