redmine_files

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the two actions but does not describe side effects, permissions required, rate limits, or return values. For a mutation (create) and list tool, this is insufficient transparency.

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?

Three words with a colon and comma is under-specification, not conciseness. A proper sentence or structured bullet points would be more appropriate given the tool's complexity.

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 8 parameters, nested objects (file, files), no output schema, and no description beyond the action list, the tool is severely underspecified. There is no explanation of how actions use parameters, pagination behavior, or the relationship between file and files, making it grossly incomplete.

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 coverage is 50%, and the description adds no new parameter details beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., 'files' and 'query' have descriptions in schema). The description does not compensate for the uncovered parameters like 'file' or 'limit' with additional context, so it meets the baseline for moderate coverage.

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 'Manage project files: list, create.' clearly states the verb (manage) and resources (project files) and enumerates the two supported actions (list, create), making it distinct from sibling tools like redmine_attachments or redmine_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?

No guidance is provided on when to use list vs create, no prerequisites (e.g., requiring upload_token for create), and no mention of alternatives among sibling tools. The description lacks any usage context.

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