bulk_download_assets

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it returns a download URL for a ZIP file. It does not mention whether the operation is synchronous or asynchronous, whether it creates a job, any limits on asset count or size, auth requirements, or URL expiration. This is a minimal 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence: 'Get a download URL for multiple assets (returns a ZIP file)'. Every word earns its place, and the parenthetical efficiently communicates the return type. No fluff or redundancy.

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 has 5 parameters and no output schema, but the schema already documents all parameters with descriptions. The description covers the return value (a ZIP file URL) but omits important context such as whether the download is asynchronous, how long the URL is valid, or any constraints on the bulk operation. Given the complexity, the description is adequate but not complete.

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 100% with every parameter having its own description, so the baseline is 3. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema; it only mentions 'multiple assets', which maps to the asset_ids parameter. No compensation needed.

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?

Clearly states the action ('Get a download URL') and resource ('multiple assets'), with a parenthetical specifying the output is a ZIP file. This distinguishes it from single-asset tools like get_asset_download and from create_download/get_download which likely manage download jobs.

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 gives clear context that this is for multiple assets, implying use when you need to download more than one asset at a time. It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, but the 'multiple assets' phrasing provides sufficient directional clarity.

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