enqueue_download

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source for behavioral disclosure. It mentions creating or deduplicating a job, implying state mutation, but does not detail side effects like whether jobs start processing immediately, or whether deduplication guarantees idempotency.

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 sentence, highly concise, conveys core purpose without fluff. Could benefit from structured bullet points listing parameters or behavior, but current length is acceptable.

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?

The tool has an output schema but the description does not explain what it returns. For a complex tool with nested options, the description should clarify required parameters, default behaviors (like deduplication logic), and output format. Missing significant context.

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 the description must explain parameters. The description does not mention the 'url' or 'options' parameters, leaving the agent to infer from names alone. The 'options' nested object with 6 properties is completely 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?

Description clearly states the tool creates or deduplicates a job and enqueues it for processing. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_job_status (read status) and probe_url (inspect URL). However, it lacks specificity on what 'dedupe' entails.

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?

No usage guidelines provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives, such as when to enqueue versus when to probe a URL or check job status.

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