download_model

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

Annotations already disclose that this is a destructive, non-idempotent, open-world write operation. The description adds useful context that the download lands in Maestro-owned storage and covers a complete artifact set, but it does not explain overwrite behavior, confirm/plan semantics, or what happens on repeat calls.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action, scope, and destination efficiently.

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?

Output schema and rich annotations are present, reducing the description's burden. However, for a destructive open-world download with a confirm parameter, more detail about plan mode and overwrite behavior would improve completeness, and sibling differentiation is absent.

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 coverage is 100%, so both slug and confirm are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter formats, aliases, or the plan-vs-execute behavior of confirm, so it meets the baseline for fully documented schemas.

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 states a specific verb and resource: download a complete model artifact set into Maestro-owned storage. It distinguishes itself from bulk alternatives like download_missing_models by emphasizing a 'complete' single artifact set, though it does not name siblings explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus download_missing_models, register_model, or list_models/find_model. The description implies usage but provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or decision criteria.

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