foundry_download_file

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows the operation is safe. The description adds no further behavioral context—it doesn't mention error handling, authentication requirements, response format, or side effects. It merely restates the purpose without disclosing any traits beyond the annotation.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the key action, and contains no waste or redundant details. It is optimally sized for the information it conveys.

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 has 5 parameters and no output schema, but the schema descriptions are comprehensive and the read-only annotation provides safety context. The description lacks discussion of edge cases, defaults, or how to choose among the optional parameters, but given the schema coverage, it is minimally adequate. More context (e.g., file not found behavior or source selection) would improve 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 input schema covers all 5 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters; it relies entirely on the schema. Since the schema is thorough, this is adequate but not improved by the description.

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 a Foundry file source'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like foundry_upload_file or foundry_list_files. It is unambiguous and immediately tells the agent what the tool does.

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. It does not mention that this should be used for retrieving file contents as opposed to foundry_list_files for metadata, nor any preconditions or context. The description provides no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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