liara_get_object_download_url

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves a URL but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, whether the URL is temporary or permanent, or what happens if the object doesn't exist. For a tool that likely generates time-sensitive URLs, this is insufficient.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward retrieval operation and front-loads the core purpose.

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 tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the download URL looks like, whether it's signed or public, how expiration works, or error conditions. Given the complexity of URL generation and the lack of structured metadata, more context is needed.

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 schema has 100% description coverage, so parameters are well-documented in the structured data. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond the tool name implying 'object' relates to 'objectKey'. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding.

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 ('Get download URL') and resource ('for an object'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'liara_get_backup_download_url' or 'liara_upload_object', but it's not misleading or tautological.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are related tools like 'liara_get_backup_download_url' for backups and 'liara_upload_object' for uploads, but no indication of when this specific object URL tool is appropriate or what prerequisites might be needed.

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