go_mod_download

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose that downloading may modify the module cache or require network access, nor does it mention any safety considerations (e.g., idempotency, destructive potential). For a tool that fetches dependencies, this is insufficient 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 extremely concise (one sentence) but lacks structure. It is not overly verbose, but the brevity sacrifices detail. A slightly longer description with structured sections could improve usability without losing conciseness.

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 tool has no output schema and few sibling differentiators. The description does not explain what 'downloading' entails (e.g., updates go.sum, populates cache), nor does it note prerequisites (e.g., requires go.mod). For a simple command wrapper, the description is minimally adequate but leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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 description adds no extra meaning beyond the input schema, which already describes all three parameters with generic labels (e.g., 'Additional arguments'). With 100% schema description coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate; the description does not improve parameter 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 ('Download') and the resource ('Go module dependencies'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like go_mod_tidy by specifying the download action, but could be more precise (e.g., 'execute go mod download') to fully differentiate.

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 usage guidance provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like go_mod_tidy, go_build, or run_tests. An agent has no basis for selecting this tool over similar sibling tools.

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