download_attachment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses one behavioral rule (if out_path is a directory, the server-provided filename is used) and that it writes to local disk, but omits overwrite behavior, permission/auth requirements, and error handling for an attachment download.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and each sentence adds non-redundant information. 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?

For a simple two-parameter download with an output schema (so return values need not be explained), the description covers the action, destination, and filename-resolution rule. It leaves minor gaps around overwriting and permissions, but is largely complete for the tool's complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It identifies attachment_id as an entity attachment UUID and gives meaningful semantics for out_path (directory vs. file handling), but does not document UUID format, path format, or expected values for a tool with two fully undocumented required parameters.

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 ('Download an entity attachment by UUID') and the side effect ('save it locally'), which distinguishes it from sibling write tool attach_file. It does not explicitly name or contrast with a sibling alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as attach_file, nor prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Download'.

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