resolve_material_link

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors. It mentions download and parse actions but omits key traits: whether it's read-only, authentication needs, error handling, or if parsing alters state. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation-capable tool.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the core action ('Download and parse'). It is efficient, though the trailing '- resource' adds minor clutter without improving clarity.

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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and two required parameters, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on return format, failure modes, and setup prerequisites, leaving the agent with incomplete context 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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about file types (PDFs, Images), which loosely relates to resourceId, but offers no additional clarity on ‘kind’ beyond the schema’s examples.

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 the tool downloads and parses internal university files (PDFs, Images), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_course_content (listing) and list_courses. However, the purpose is slightly vague due to the appended '- resource' suffix.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_course_content or resolve_proxy. The description lacks any when-to-use or when-not-to-use context, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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