Get Case PDF URL

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

With no annotations, the description carries full weight. It explicitly discloses that the URL is an encrypted presigned S3 URL that must not be fetched directly, expires after the returned expiresIn seconds, and returns 404 if no document exists. Also notes no AI credits are consumed, which is useful operational context.

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 well-structured: it front-loads the core purpose, then presents a critical warning about the encrypted URL and expiration. Each sentence adds necessary value, with no filler or redundancy.

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 description covers return behavior (pdfUrl and expiresIn), error case (404), encryption/decryption requirement, and expiration semantics. Given the complexity of the tool and lack of output schema, this is sufficiently complete for an agent to handle the tool 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?

The input schema already has 100% coverage with a detailed description of the id parameter, including the ObjectId-or-case-number lookup order. The tool description does not add further parameter detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 returns a time-limited link to an official judgment PDF for a case. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_case or analyze_case, which serve different resources. The verb 'returns' and resource 'PDF URL' make the purpose unambiguous.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool (retrieving a case PDF URL) and includes important usage warnings, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria. The purpose is obvious enough to infer appropriate usage relative to siblings.

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