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

Annotations provide no safety hints (all false), so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'Complete the upload process' without disclosing side effects, such as asset creation, validation, or potential errors. This is nearly a tautology of the tool name.

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 one concise sentence with no redundant words, front-loading the action and context. It is appropriately short, though it could have included more behavioral context without becoming verbose.

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 captures the essential step and references the presigned URL flow, and an output schema exists. However, it omits details about required preconditions (e.g., calling media_upload_start), validation, and what 'completing' entails, making it minimally adequate for a 7-parameter tool.

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 7 parameters with rich descriptions (100% coverage), including formats, constraints, and optionality. The tool description adds no parametric detail, but the schema alone provides sufficient semantics, justifying the baseline score of 3.

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 specifically states the action 'Complete' and the resource 'upload process,' with the context 'after uploading to a presigned URL.' This clearly identifies the tool's role in the upload workflow and distinguishes it from siblings like media_upload_start and media_upload_file.

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 phrase 'after uploading to a presigned URL' provides clear sequencing and prerequisite guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, leaving some room for ambiguity.

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