declarations_download_xml

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 states the return is 'raw XML content' which adds some value, but doesn't disclose expectations about file size, whether the XML is already generated or requires generation, error scenarios (e.g., declaration not yet prepared), or any side effects (it's a read, but no confirmation). For an unannotated tool this is thin.

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?

Two short sentences, zero wasted words. Efficiently conveys purpose and expected return type.

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?

For a simple single-required-param read tool with full schema coverage, the description is arguably sufficient at a basic level. However, the behavioral gap around whether the XML must already be generated (or if download triggers generation) and the relationship to declarations_prepare/declarations_agent_result aren't addressed. No output schema exists, so the 'raw XML content' note is helpful, but more on failure modes would strengthen it.

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 the schema documents both parameters (id='Declaration UUID', companyId='Company UUID (overrides STORNO_COMPANY_ID env var)'). The description adds nothing beyond schema. With full schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Download') and resource ('generated XML for a tax declaration'), and notes the return type ('raw XML content'). It distinguishes from sibling declarations_get, which likely returns JSON metadata, and declarations_agent_result. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other download-ish tools like exports_download or declarations_prepare.

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 says to download XML for a tax declaration but gives no guidance on when to use this versus declarations_get, declarations_validate, or declarations_prepare. There's no indication of prerequisites (e.g., must the declaration be generated/prepared first?) or when this tool would fail. No alternatives are named.

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