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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the 5MB limit, default profile sync, and implies a mutating upload. It does not mention response behavior or error handling, but covers the key behavioral aspects sufficiently for an upload tool.

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?

Three efficient, front-loaded sentences cover purpose, constraints, and alternative usage. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 explains the operation's scope, constraints, and fallback, but omits any mention of return values or success/failure indicators. Given the lack of output schema, a brief note on the expected response would make it more complete, but the current content is adequate for most use cases.

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 100%, so parameters are well-documented. The description adds a small note about default sync, but mostly reiterates schema content. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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's function: 'Upload a resume from a publicly accessible URL.' It specifies the resource (resume) and the method (from URL), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_resume or generate_resume_for_job by focusing on ingestion from a URL.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives: users without a hosted resume are directed to upload directly from their profile. It also states file type and size constraints, and mentions the default sync behavior, giving clear usage context.

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