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

With no annotations, the description must fully cover behavioral traits. It only states the action and permission, omitting details like idempotency, file overwrite behavior, bundle existence validation, size limits, or error conditions. The term 'text files' may mislead if binary content is allowed via mediaType.

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 very short and front-loaded with the main verb, but it is too brief to be informative. While concise, it sacrifices necessary details, making it minimally adequate.

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?

Given no schema descriptions, no output schema, and only 2 parameters, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain return values, error handling, or parameter details, leaving the agent with little usable context.

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 0% description coverage, yet the description adds no information about the parameters (artifactBundleId, files, or sub-properties like path, content, message). The agent must infer meaning solely from parameter names, which is insufficient.

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 'Upload one or more text files into an artifact bundle,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_artifact_bundle' (create bundle) and 'update_artifact_file' (modify existing file), though it does not explicitly contrast with update or mention that upload creates new files.

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 mentions a permission requirement ('Requires files:write') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_artifact_file' or 'create_artifact_bundle'. No context on prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases.

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