Download an artifact

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

The description explains key behaviors: inline vs file write based on outputPath, and format for slide decks. Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, but writing to disk contradicts that; however, the description itself is transparent about this side effect.

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?

Three sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with main action, then conditional details, then specific format note. Every sentence earns its place.

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 types and side effects. It could mention error cases or large artifact handling, but for a download tool it is fairly 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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the behavior of outputPath and format, and the inline return strategy for small artifacts.

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 it resolves and downloads an artifact's content, with specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like artifact_get and artifact_list by focusing on content download.

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 for downloading artifacts, with conditional behavior for outputPath and format. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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