mybox_download

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful traits: the skip/idempotency rule for an existing same-name-same-size file, and a per-day quota that is small on entry plans. It stops short of describing what happens when a same-name file differs in size (overwrite vs. error) or any auth/prerequisite requirements.

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?

Two compact sentences, purpose and return value front-loaded, followed by the operational caution. Minimal waste, though restating the returned path is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists.

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?

For a simple two-parameter download with an output schema, the core behavior (skip logic, quota) is covered and return values need not be described. Still, with zero parameter descriptions and no annotations, edge-case behaviors (existing-file conflict with different size, dest_dir preconditions, auth) are left unaddressed.

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% for both required parameters, so the description must compensate. It only gestures at dest_dir via 'into a local directory' and says nothing about resource_id format, nor whether dest_dir must already exist. The gap is not filled.

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 ('Download one file into a local directory') plus the side effect ('return the path written'). This is precise enough to separate it from mybox_upload, mybox_list, and mybox_search without opening any schema.

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?

Offers a real usage caution ('Download quotas are per day and small on entry plans, so avoid re-downloading'), which implicitly tells the agent not to call it needlessly. However, it never names an alternative tool or a condition for preferring mybox_file_info/mybox_search instead, so routing guidance is only implied.

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