Download uploaded document

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

The description adds real context beyond the annotations by disclosing the side effect that a file is written to the server's filesystem and that the return value is a path. It does not cover overwrite behavior, target directory conventions, or failure modes. The filesystem write is a local side effect but does not meaningfully contradict readOnlyHint, which concerns the remote data store.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and ending with what is returned. No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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?

It is a simple one-parameter tool with an output schema, and the description explains both the action and the shape of the result, so there is little missing. The only notable gap is the absent guidance on document_id provenance and on filesystem target behavior.

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%, so document_id is completely undocumented in the schema. The description only implies that the value refers to an uploaded document; it gives no format, source, or validity guidance to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 and resource: it "saves the original file of an uploaded document" and returns its path. That clearly separates it from get_uploaded_document and list_uploaded_documents, which deal in metadata rather than the file itself, though neither sibling is named explicitly.

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 rather than stated: the phrase "on the machine running uol-mcp" hints this is for when you need a local copy of the file. There is no explicit when-to-use, no mention of how it differs from get_uploaded_document, and no note about where a document_id can be obtained.

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