download_sample

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses critical behavioral traits: writes to quarantine directory, never executes/unpacks/opens, risk of live malware, and the two-step gate process. This is exceptionally transparent.

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?

Extremely concise with only a few sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Uses emphasis (DANGER, NEVER, REFUSES) to highlight critical warnings without extra 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 a high-risk tool with no annotations but with output schema, the description covers safety, gate process, and destination (SANDBOX_ARTIFACTS_DIR). Could optionally mention what to do after download, but not essential.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining the acknowledge_malware_download parameter's role in the gate process, beyond the schema's default and required status. The other parameters (target, sandbox) are well-described in schema without duplication.

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 tool downloads a malware sample to disk for offline analysis, using specific verbs ('Download') and resources ('malware sample'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_samples and submit_sample by focusing on downloading and the GATED mechanism.

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?

Provides clear instructions on when to use: requires acknowledge_malware_download flag and describes a two-step process (first without flag, then with flag after user confirmation). Does not explicitly compare to alternatives but the context of danger and isolation is strong guidance.

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