download_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and adds valuable behavioral context: it discloses a size limitation ('1MB以上のファイルは正常にダウンロードできない場合があります' - files over 1MB may not download properly). This is important operational information not captured elsewhere. No contradictions exist since annotations are empty.

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 sentences with zero waste: first states the core purpose, second provides critical behavioral constraint. Both sentences earn their place by adding distinct value. The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the main functionality.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides good coverage: clear purpose, important behavioral constraint about file size limitations. While it doesn't explain return values or error conditions, the size warning addresses a key operational consideration for this type of 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 description coverage is 100% with the single parameter 'file_key' already documented as 'ダウンロードするファイルのキー' (key of file to download). The description doesn't add any additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so 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 clearly states the action ('ダウンロードします' - downloads) and resource ('kintoneアプリからファイル' - file from kintone app). It's specific about what the tool does, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'upload_file' beyond the obvious directionality.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. While 'upload_file' is clearly the opposite operation, there's no explicit comparison or context about when download versus other file-related operations would be appropriate.

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