huddo_download

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses caching from the local store, no overwriting with numbered copies, the default directory, and that file paths are returned. It stops short of covering error cases, directory creation, or attachment-less messages, but the key side effects are transparent.

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?

Three tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by operational details. Every sentence adds useful information with no 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?

Given four fully documented schema parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it explains return values, caching, and overwrite behavior. Minor gaps remain around failure modes and whether directories are created, but nothing critical is missing 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds the default output directory and reinforces that msgid refers to a message with attachments, but does not add meaning beyond the schema for 'as' or 'room'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: save the attachments of a message to a local directory and return file paths. It is clear enough to distinguish from siblings like huddo_files or huddo_read, though it does not explicitly name an alternative tool.

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 usage context is implied — download attachments for a given message — but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to huddo_files, huddo_read, or huddo_show. The note about room history helps, but it is more behavioral than selection guidance.

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