emule_download

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the tool not only enqueues the link but also verifies that it was queued. However, it does not mention failure modes, connection requirements, duplicate-handling, or error behavior, leaving a moderate transparency gap.

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 one tight sentence that front-loads the action and includes the outcome. Every word contributes value, with no repetition or filler.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the input, the mutation, and the confirmation behavior. It does not specify exact return shapes or edge-case errors, but an agent has enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema provides only a parameter name and type with 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning by identifying the parameter as an eD2k file link to be queued, which is the core semantic an agent needs. It stops short of giving an example or exact format, but for a single-parameter tool this is largely sufficient.

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 states a specific verb and resource: adding an eD2k link to eMule's download queue, plus the expected confirmation outcome. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like emule_search (finding files) and emule_list_downloads (viewing the queue).

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 intended use is clear: call this when you have an eD2k file link and want to start a download. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to choose it over the listed sibling tools.

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