get_file_download_url

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 that the URL is presigned and has a 15-minute validity, but does not mention authorization requirements, error cases (e.g., non-existent file), or what happens upon expiry. It adds some behavioral context but leaves gaps.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, e.g., mentioning that the URL can be used to download the file directly.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema, low complexity), but the description does not specify the return format (e.g., the URL string) or any necessary preconditions like file existence or permissions. While the URL validity info is useful, the description could be more complete given the lack of annotations and output schema.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a description for fileId ('Teralynk file ID'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond that. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema already handles the parameter documentation.

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 'Get a presigned download URL for a file.' This uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_file (which downloads the file content) and list_files (which lists files).

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only mentions the URL validity period (15 minutes), but no when/when-not or alternative tool suggestions. Given the sibling list, more explicit usage guidance would be helpful.

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