입찰공고 첨부 다운로드·파일 목록

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

Thoroughly describes side effects: downloads, extracts ZIPs, deletes original ZIP, stores in specific directory, uses cache, and refresh behavior. Annotations (readOnlyHint: false, openWorldHint: true) are consistent with this mutation behavior.

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?

Information-dense paragraph that front-loads the main action. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points), but every sentence adds value and it's not overly long.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully explains the return (file catalog without text), how to use indices with read_attachment, directory location, cache behavior, and non-extractable files. Comprehensive for a 2-parameter tool.

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%, and the description adds significant context: explains refresh (ignore cache) and bidNtceNo (triggers download/extraction). Also details how results are used with other tools, adding value beyond schema descriptions.

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 all attachments, extracts ZIPs (deleting originals), and returns a file catalog. It distinguishes from siblings: get_bid_attachments for URLs only, read_attachment for reading file content.

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 mentions when to use: when you need downloaded files and a catalog. Advises using get_bid_attachments for URLs only, and read_attachment with index for file content. Also explains refresh parameter for updated attachments.

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