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

Annotations already mark the call read-only, and the description adds the behavioral details that matter: accepted formats, size and count limits, 48-hour link expiration, the upload-then-return flow, and that nothing is charged. These go well beyond what readOnlyHint alone conveys.

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 dense paragraph, but every clause earns its place: trigger condition, action, constraints, expiry, follow-up, and alternative. The key instruction is front-loaded, and the supporting limits are compactly listed.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description still covers the full workflow: when to call, what the user does, what to do after upload, the token shape for references, and the web-URL alternative. Nothing an agent needs to orchestrate this step is missing.

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 has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document. The description still adds useful context by showing how the upload token will be used in a later kleo_adapt_prompt call, which is sufficient for an agent invoking a parameterless tool.

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 states a precise action: generate an upload link for user-supplied pictures Kleo should reference. It distinguishes the tool from kleo_adapt_prompt by assigning this tool to the collection step and the sibling to the reference-processing step, so an agent can tell them apart.

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?

It explicitly says when to call this tool (user attached photos or says they have photos), what to do with the result (give the link, wait for upload), and the exact follow-up (call kleo_adapt_prompt with upload tokens). It also gives the alternative for web pictures: pass URLs directly instead.

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