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

Annotations already declare this as a non-read-only, open-world operation, and the description adds the 'seed' behavior, indicating initial content upload. However, it does not disclose consequences like duplicate bag handling, funding requirements, or external side effects beyond creation.

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 entire description is a single 12-word sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no redundant information.

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?

For a create tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is serviceable but lacks return-value information and any context about the 'name' field. It does not fully cover the behavior necessary for an agent to invoke it confidently, though the schema fills some gaps.

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 schema has two parameters but the description provides 0% parameter coverage. It only vaguely says 'explicit file contents,' leaving the optional 'name' parameter and the file object structure (text vs. base64) unexplained.

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 'create and seed' with the resource 'TON Storage bag' and source 'explicit file contents,' clearly differentiating it from other storage operations like deleting, listing, or pinning. This directly states 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?

The description implies the tool is for creating and seeding a bag from file contents, but it offers no explicit guidance on when to choose this over related tools such as pin_bag or publish_files. There is no 'when not to use' or alternative tool mentioned.

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