Download Chat Attachment

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral details: it saves to local disk and returns either a file path (stdio) or a temporary URL valid for 1 hour (HTTP). This goes beyond the annotation defaults and clarifies the tool's side effects and result format.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and then a concise breakdown of mode-specific returns. Every sentence adds value, and there is no extraneous information.

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 low complexity of the tool and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete: it explains the core action, mode-specific output, and the temporary URL validity. No further context is needed for an agent to invoke 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 description coverage is 67% (message_id and attachment_index are described, user_google_email is not). The description does not add details about parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it doesn't compensate for the missing description of user_google_email. 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 tool's function: 'Downloads an attachment from a Google Chat message and saves it to local disk.' This is a specific verb+resource+action, and it distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_gmail_attachment_content (Gmail) and get_drive_file_download_url (Drive) by explicitly mentioning Google Chat.

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 clear context for use (Google Chat attachments) and even explains mode-specific behavior (stdio vs HTTP). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is sufficiently clear given the many sibling workspace tools.

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