download_attachment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. However, it adds no extra behavioral context such as overwrite behavior, permission requirements, or that the operation is local to the server. Since annotations carry the safety profile, this is baseline for an annotated tool.

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 with no redundancy. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's action and destination.

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 is adequate for a simple download tool but lacks important contextual guidance: no usage context, no parameter details beyond names, and no indication of return values (no output schema). With 0% schema coverage and missing usage guidelines, it is 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies 'save_path' by saying 'local file path', but message_id and attachment_id are left only to their self-explanatory names. No additional semantics are provided for these parameters, though the names are meaningful.

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 uses a specific verb ('download') and resource ('attachment') with a clear destination ('local file path'), making its purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_attachments and get_message by indicating an action that retrieves content to a file.

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 when an attachment's content is needed locally, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like obtaining message_id and attachment_id from list_attachments. Context is implied but not explicit.

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