download_apk

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

Goes well beyond annotations by disclosing file output, caching, verification of manifest/signature, host prerequisites (Android SDK aapt/apksigner, Java), potential multi-minute duration, and the fact that it does not install or run the APK. No contradiction with readOnlyHint=false or destructiveHint=false.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: output fields, verification/caching behavior, prerequisites, runtime, and rate-limit guidance are packed in a compact, front-loaded description. The dense 'max_mib:' line is an efficient way to encode parameter constraints.

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 two-parameter tool with an output schema, this description covers the return values, external prerequisites, runtime expectations, HTTP failure handling, and side-effect boundaries. Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining that package_name is the sole required identifier and by giving max_mib's range and default (1..4096, 1024). It could more explicitly define max_mib as the maximum download size in MiB, but the title plus range is reasonably self-explanatory.

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 ('Download'), resource ('APK from RuStore'), and input ('using just its package name'), clearly distinguishing this from a generic download or info-only sibling. The 'latest free standalone' qualifier further narrows the operation.

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?

Provides clear operational guidance: call sequentially for a package list and stop on HTTP 403/429. It does not explicitly say when to prefer the sibling get_apk_info instead, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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