download_bucket

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

The description discloses the destination (local buckets/ folder) and the scoping options, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., overwriting local files), authentication requirements, or rate limits. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, and while it is not misleading, it omits important behavioral context.

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 concise sentences with front-loaded action and clear options. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or extraneous detail.

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 description covers the main functionality and parameter relationships but omits the limit parameter, return format, and error conditions. Given the lack of output schema and annotations, it leaves gaps that an agent would need to infer or discover.

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 description coverage is 75% (bucket, folder, file described; limit not). The description adds value by explaining how parameters relate (folder and file require bucket), but does not mention the limit parameter. Thus it adds some meaning beyond the schema but is incomplete.

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 action ('Download files') and the resource ('from Supabase storage to local buckets/ folder'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_buckets (list only) and list_files (list files) by specifying the download action and the ability to scope to all buckets, one bucket, folder, or file.

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 explains what the tool can do but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like list_buckets or manage_bucket. The usage context is implied (download vs. list) but not stated, leaving the agent to infer appropriate scenarios.

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