save_attachment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It notes the default destination (~/Desktop) but fails to disclose potential side effects like overwriting existing files, directory creation, or required permissions. This is a significant gap for a file-saving operation.

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 a single sentence that immediately conveys the action and key default. It contains no redundant words and is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool with two parameters and no nested objects, the description provides enough context: it states the purpose, the default destination, and the prerequisite tool. It does not explain return values, but the absence of an output schema makes this less critical. It could mention what happens on success/failure, but overall it is sufficiently complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 already covers both parameters with 100% description coverage, including the source_path origin and destination default. The description adds little beyond restating these facts ('defaults to Desktop' and 'from get_attachments results'), so it meets the baseline without enhancing meaning.

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 uses a specific verb ('Save/copy') and clearly identifies the resource ('a message attachment') and destination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_attachments, which retrieves rather than saves.

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 description provides clear context by stating 'Use after get_attachments to save files,' which gives sequencing. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternative tools beyond the prerequisite.

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