Download Export Job

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: byte fidelity including ZIP, no parsing/unpacking, size and SHA-256 verification before atomic publication, overwrite defaulting to false, and the irreversibility of an expired artifact. This is unusually complete disclosure for a write-to-disk 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 core action and its boundaries are front-loaded in the first two sentences, followed by verification behavior and the two caveats (overwrite, expired artifact). Dense but every sentence carries operational information with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be detailed, yet the description still notes it returns output_path. Combined with preconditions, failure modes (expired artifact), and byte-preservation behavior, nothing needed to invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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 75% and the schema already documents overwrite (with default) and output_path (with path semantics and ZIP caveat). The description restates overwrite's default and intent but adds no new syntax or format detail, so it largely duplicates structured data. 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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Save the artifact of an existing completed export_job_id to local disk.' It also draws explicit boundaries against siblings by declaring it does not submit another export, wait for completion, or parse/unpack the artifact, which separates it from download_results, get_export_job, and wait_for_export_job.

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?

Gives explicit routing: 'Use get_export_job or wait_for_export_job first if needed,' and states the precondition that the job must already be completed. It also gives the condition for overwrite ('enable only when replacing a local file is intended') and warns that retrying cannot recover an expired artifact.

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