jira_attachment_download

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 files are written to disk, returns YAML metadata, and explains temp directory behavior. However, it does not mention permissions, error handling (e.g., missing attachments), or whether the operation is safe (read-only). Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise with three sentences, each serving a purpose. The first sentence states the core action, the second explains the output and default behavior, the third provides a reference. Front-loaded with the main 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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately explains return values (YAML metadata fields) and the temp directory mechanism. It covers the main use case. However, it lacks details on error conditions or handling of edge cases like no attachments.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds some context for output_dir (temp directory) but repeats schema descriptions for filter and key. Minimal additional value beyond schema.

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 tool downloads attachments from a JIRA issue to disk, using the verb 'download' and specifying the resource 'attachments on a JIRA issue'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like jira_attachment_images but does not explicitly differentiate from other attachment tools.

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 some usage context (e.g., omitting output_dir uses temp directory, assistant can read files via filesystem tool) but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like jira_attachment_images or when not to use it. No explicit when/when-not or alternative suggestions.

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