get_attachment_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that the URL is temporary and the default expiration (1 hour), but does not mention any other side effects, auth requirements, or error behavior. This is adequate for a simple get operation but lacks depth.

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 two sentences, with a clear first sentence followed by a concise parameter list. Every word earns its place; no fluff.

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 is simple (2 params, output schema exists). The description covers the core functionality and parameters, and with an output schema present, return values need not be spelled out. It could mention prerequisites like having an existing attachment ID, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description explains both parameters: attachment_id as 'The attachment ID' and expires_in as 'URL lifetime in seconds (default: 3600 = 1 hour)'. This adds meaning beyond the schema types and defaults, effectively compensating for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Get' with a clear resource 'temporary download URL for an attachment', and the 'temporary' qualifier distinguishes it from any other URL retrieval tool. It clearly states what the tool does.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough that it implies usage after an attachment has been uploaded. However, there are no exclusions or alternative tool references.

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