get_download_progress

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that stalled transfers auto-resume and should not be cancelled, and explains how to interpret silent_for_s. It also implies read-only nature via 'Report', but does not explicitly confirm non-mutation or error handling.

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?

The description is well-structured with a concise main purpose, a useful interpretive note, and a clear argument specification. Every sentence adds value; no fluff or repetition.

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?

For a single-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers all needed context: parameter format, interpretation of results, and actionable guidance. It is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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?

The description fully documents the only parameter job_id, providing three acceptable forms: folder/filename, filename only, or empty for most recent. This goes far beyond the schema, which only shows a default value.

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?

Begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Report how far a download has got' and lists concrete outputs (bytes, percent, speed, ETA). This clearly distinguishes it from related tools like download_model and cancel_download.

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?

Provides clear operational guidance: explains that silent_for_s indicates stall vs. slow link, and advises waiting for silence exceeding COMFYUI_DOWNLOAD_TIMEOUT before acting. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use this tool.

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