Search Downloads

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds behavior beyond them: it operates on the local cache only and does NOT return file contents. The handoff workflow for actually viewing a file is non-obvious and valuable. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Front-loads the [로컬] scope and the core action, then the key behavioral caveat (no file contents), then the workflow, then sibling alternatives. Every sentence carries distinct, necessary information with no 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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary. The description covers scope, output limitation, downstream workflow, and sibling routing — everything an agent needs to call this 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all 7 parameters are already documented. The parenthetical (filename/course/extension/source/date range) merely restates the filterable dimensions the schema defines, adding no syntax or format detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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+resource with explicit scope: filter-searching only the MCP server's local cache of downloaded file records. It distinguishes itself from eclass_list_downloads and eclass_get_download_status by name, so an agent can select it 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use alternatives: full listing → eclass_list_downloads, per-course summary → eclass_get_download_status. It also explains the downstream workflow (use file_id with eclass_file_handoff to get a /files/<token> URL and open it via browsing), which is exactly the routing an agent needs.

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