Download a ticket attachment

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

The description explains the side effect of downloading to the local filesystem and clarifies how the destination parameter behaves (directory vs. file path). This adds value beyond the annotations, which only indicate mutability and open-world hints.

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 with two sentences: the first states the purpose, the second explains parameter usage and behavior. No unnecessary words, and it is appropriately front-loaded.

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 tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers prerequisites and parameter behavior, though it does not mention the return value or potential error conditions, which would be useful for completeness.

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 schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by specifying the source of the url (from zendesk_get_ticket) and elaborating on the destination behavior, making it more helpful than the schema alone.

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 action (download), the resource (attachment), and the context (authenticated Zendesk session). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying the prerequisite of obtaining the content_url from zendesk_get_ticket.

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 on when to use the tool by instructing to provide the content_url from zendesk_get_ticket, implying a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools.

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