Download File

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only and not destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: the tool writes to a local directory, the agent must ask for a download path, and the agent should suggest a readable filename. It doesn't mention overwrite behavior, but the provided guidance is meaningful.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: it states the action, the usage context, and critical instructions. The included example filename is concrete and useful, not filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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 the main workflow well: purpose, when to use, required user interaction, and filename handling. A minor gap is that it doesn't explicitly explain the relationship between topicId/folderId/fileId or state that a source identifier is needed to actually download. Still, for the complexity level, it is largely complete.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra semantics for downloadPath by emphasizing the user must choose it, and for customFilename by explaining how to suggest and apply a renamed file. This goes beyond the schema's basic parameter descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Download a file from course content or assignment submissions to a local directory.' It clearly states the tool's scope and differentiates it from the sibling tools, which are all read/retrieval operations rather than file downloads.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: 'Use this when the user wants to download, save, or get a file from Brightspace course content or dropbox submissions.' It also provides a mandatory prerequisite—asking the user where to save the file—and explains the filename renaming workflow, leaving little to inference.

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