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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the two-step ordering and the downstream use of asset_id, but says nothing about idempotency, whether a premature call fails, upload_id expiry, or authentication requirements for a state-finalizing operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler: action, prerequisite, and output are packed into one clause, and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 one-parameter finalization step with an output schema present, the description covers sequencing and the follow-up use of the result, so an agent can place the call correctly. Only failure-mode and prerequisite detail about upload_id are 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain upload_id, yet it never says where the id originates or what format it takes. The parameter name is self-describing, but the only real meaning added is implied by 'after the PUT'.

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?

States a specific action ('Finish an upload') plus the exact point it applies ('after the PUT') and what it yields ('asset_id'). This cleanly separates it from the sibling create_upload, which starts the sequence rather than ending it.

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?

Gives a clear triggering condition — call it after the PUT — and tells the agent where the result goes (a generation's references). It does not name exclusions or contrast failures, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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