get_file_download_urlResolve a Quercus file ID to retrieve its metadata and authenticated download URL, enabling read-only access to Canvas course files.
Resolve a Quercus file ID to its metadata and authenticated download URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| file_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it does disclose one meaningful trait: the returned URL is 'authenticated,' signaling credential requirements that a plain ID-to-URL mapping would not imply. It says nothing about URL expiry, permission scoping, or rate limits, so transparency remains partial.
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?
One sentence, zero waste, with the resource and the return value front-loaded. Nothing redundant against the title.
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 one-param lookup with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers what is returned (metadata + URL) but omits how to source the file_id and any URL lifetime or auth caveats an agent would need to use the result 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 coverage is 0% for the single file_id parameter. The description does clarify that the ID is a Quercus file ID rather than an arbitrary string, but it does not explain the ID format or where to obtain it, leaving the parameter only partly compensated.
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: resolve a Quercus file ID to metadata and an authenticated download URL. The purpose is unambiguous and distinct from read-only listers like list_files, though it never names a sibling to differentiate itself 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 guidance on when to use this versus list_files, nor on the prerequisite of obtaining a file_id first. The agent must infer the workflow entirely from the name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.