Fetch a derived artifact to disk

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

The readOnlyHint already estabishes safety; the description adds useful behavioral detail: bytes are never returned into context, only a path is returned, and the default target path pattern is disclosed. It does not discuss overwrite/error behavior, but that is minor for a read-only download.

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 compact sentences front-load the action and resource, then the side-effect and default path. Every element earns its place and the parenthetical examples aid matching without bloat.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly supplies the returned path and default behavior. It could specify failure modes or overwrite semantics, but for a simple read-only download with two required parameters the definition is nearly complete.

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 documents derived_key and out_path, while the description's default-target template gives scan_id and derived_key relational meaning plus artifact examples. It does not restate out_path, but that parameter is already self-describing.

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?

States a specific action ('download ... to a local file and return the path') on a specific resource ('derived/... artifact') with concrete examples. This clearly separates it from scene/workspace tools and from the specialized artifact_etch_splat/cloud siblings by establishing it as the local-file artifact fetcher.

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?

Gives clear context: use when artifact bytes should be written to disk rather than brought into context, with a default output location. It does not explicitly name exclusions or the specialized siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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