Download document

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

With readOnlyHint=false the annotation only says a write occurs; the description adds the crucial clarification that the write is local-only and ProBo is unmodified, plus that large files trigger a confirmation prompt. That is real context beyond the annotations, though overwrite behavior on repeat calls (idempotentHint=true) is left unexplained.

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 destination, followed by the scope constraint and the confirmation caveat. Nothing is wasted and nothing is buried.

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 (return location need not be described) and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description only needs the local-write clarification, which it provides. Minor gaps remain around repeat-download/overwrite behavior and where the download folder is configured.

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 coverage is 100% and the single 'document' parameter is already documented as an id or attachment path, so the description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the full burden.

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 (save) and resource (document) plus the destination (local download folder), which cleanly separates it from read_document/list_documents siblings that operate inside ProBo. It stops short of naming an alternative tool explicitly, so it is clear but not sibling-differentiating at the top level.

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 phrase 'nothing changes in ProBo' and 'Save ... to the local download folder' imply this is the tool for pulling a document to disk rather than reading it in place, but no when-to-use/when-not comparison against read_document or find_documents is given.

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