sophos_download_post_delivery_quarantine_attachments

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 the tool initiates an async job and returns a downloadId for polling, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention permissions, rate limits, or whether the operation is destructive (likely non-destructive, but not explicit). The description provides basic but not comprehensive behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose and return value. Every word is meaningful, with no redundant or irrelevant information.

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?

The description adequately covers the initiation step but lacks guidance on the subsequent polling step (e.g., which tool to use with the downloadId). It does not mention prerequisites like listing attachments first. Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of sibling tools, the description is adequate but not fully 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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain where to obtain tenant_id or message_id, or format requirements for filenames).

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 (initiate a download job), the specific resource (attachments from a post-delivery quarantined message), and the return value (downloadId). It distinguishes from sibling tools like sophos_download_quarantine_attachments by specifying 'post-delivery' and hints at the async pattern with 'for status polling'.

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 implies usage (initiating a download for post-delivery quarantine), but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., sophos_download_quarantine_attachments for regular quarantine, or sophos_get_post_delivery_quarantine_download_status for polling). No exclusion criteria or context is given.

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