get_pdf

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it compiles, saves to a local file, and returns the path, which are key behaviors. However, it omits potential side effects like overwriting files or permission requirements, so it is not fully transparent.

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 sentences, each purposeful: the first states the function, the second gives usage guidance. No redundant or filler content.

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 tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, usage guidance, and return value. It lacks parameter details (already penalized) and error handling, but provides a sufficient high-level understanding.

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 schema only covers outputPath with a default note, leaving projectId undescribed. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, failing to explain what projectId identifies or how outputPath behaves beyond the schema, despite the low 50% 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 uses the specific verb 'compile and save' with a clear resource (PDF) and specifies the outcome (local file path). It also distinguishes from sibling 'compile' by indicating when to use each, making the purpose 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?

Explicitly states 'Use when you need the artifact itself; for fixing errors use compile instead.' This provides clear context and names an alternative tool, fulfilling the when-to-use guidance thoroughly.

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