download_docs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: saving to disk, including chatter files, returning saved/skipped lists, and platform-specific temp directory behavior. It does not mention file overwrite policy or permissions, but for a download tool this is reasonably transparent.

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 efficiently structured: first sentence states purpose and key nuance, second paragraph explains return format with a useful warning about skipped files, third paragraph details each parameter. Every sentence adds necessary information without repetition.

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 the tool's three parameters and no annotations, the description covers purpose, parameter details, return format, and important edge cases. The output schema is not shown but the description describes it adequately. The tool is fully explained for an AI agent to use 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides clear meanings for all three parameters: model (with example), record_id (purpose), and dest_dir (default behavior and Windows caveat). This adds significant value beyond the bare 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 verb-resource combination: 'Save every document of a record to disk — chatter files included.' It is specific about including chatter files, which distinguishes it from any sibling tool that might handle documents differently.

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 context on when the tool is relevant by explaining edge cases of skipped documents (database restore without filestore) and the default behavior of dest_dir. However, it does not explicitly define when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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