download_music

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of transparency. It only states the action and the return value ('Status message'), but does not disclose whether the download is asynchronous, what happens on failure, or any permission requirements. This is minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 concise: a single summary sentence, a parameter list, and a returns line. Every element is necessary, and there is no redundant or vague text.

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?

The tool appears to be part of a larger workflow involving search and download_status, but the description does not explain how it fits into that workflow or what the 'Status message' means in practice. The return value is vague, though an output schema exists. It lacks context about asynchronous behavior or follow-up steps.

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 description explains each parameter in plain language (e.g., 'Soulseek username who has the file' and 'Full filename path as returned by search'), adding meaning beyond the schema's basic types. It covers all three parameters, effectively compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 clearly states a specific action ('Download') and a specific resource ('a file from a Soulseek user'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_music and browse_user. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 implies usage by noting 'filename as returned by search', hinting at a prerequisite workflow, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus download_status or other alternatives. No exclusions or alternative scenarios are provided.

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