Samples Fetch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the key traits: a human-confirmation gate, a pre-download disclosure obligation, a configurable store location (~/.ismail/samples, moved by the samples setting), and that path= copies nothing. It does not say what happens on name collisions, existing downloads, or failures, which are meaningful for a network+filesystem write.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and destination, then the confirmation rule, then the path alternative. The nested parentheticals add density but each clause carries real operational information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description covers the two parameters, the consent gate, and the licence/size prerequisite. The remaining gap is failure and overwrite behavior for a tool that mutates a local store.

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 0%, so the description must compensate; it explains path precisely (a folder that already holds the set, registered instead of downloaded, nothing copied) and that name identifies the sample set. The name parameter itself is only implicitly defined, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Download a sample set into the store') with the exact destination and a named sibling (samples_list) for a different job. An agent can distinguish it from samples_list and from project/grant tools at a glance.

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?

Explicit about the gating condition (only after the person says yes) and the prerequisite step (tell them size and licence first, samples_list shows both), plus the alternative path= mode that registers rather than downloads. Lacks a 'when not to use' case such as a set already present in the store.

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