dooray_files

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only lists actions without disclosing behavioral traits like permissions needed, rate limits, side effects, or response formats. It mentions downloading content but doesn't specify if it's read-only or has destructive potential, leaving key operational details unclear.

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 concise and front-loaded, stating the main purpose in the first clause and listing key actions efficiently. It avoids unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more structured by grouping related actions or adding brief context.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 4 parameters and multiple actions. It lacks details on return values, error handling, or prerequisites, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent without additional context.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters well. The description adds minimal value by implying action types but doesn't explain parameter interactions or semantics beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 tool's purpose as managing Dooray files and images, listing specific actions like listing task files, getting metadata, and downloading content. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on file operations rather than comments, members, tasks, etc., though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to choose task-based vs. drive-based actions, or how it differs from other file-related tools if any exist. It lacks context for selection among its own actions or compared to sibling tools.

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