ilias_download_file

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the no-clobber guarantee ("Never overwrites a different file") and the sandboxed root with its env var and default path. It omits what happens when an identical file already exists, which keeps it from a 5.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the safety guarantee and path constraint. No filler; the only minor cost is the awkward line break mid-sentence.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need no prose, and the mutation/safety profile is covered. The blocking gap is the undefined "target" parameter, which leaves the agent unable to form a valid call without trial and error.

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 two required parameters. The description clarifies dest_dir only indirectly (a folder under the download root) and leaves "target" completely undefined — no indication whether it is a file ID, an ILIAS URL, or a path, which is essential for correct invocation.

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 concrete verb+resource+destination: "Save a course file to a folder inside the configured download root." An agent can tell this writes a file locally, implicitly distinct from ilias_read_file, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no routing to alternatives such as ilias_read_file (view content without saving) or ilias_scan. The only constraint given is a location constraint, not a selection rule.

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