upload_cover_image

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

Discloses the two-step process (upload to storage, then set URL) and mutation effect. However, no annotations exist, so description carries full burden. Missing details like error handling, permission needs, or behavior on invalid files.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No fluff or redundancy; every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers purpose and high-level process but omits return value, error handling, and constraints. Given no output schema and no annotations, description could be more comprehensive.

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 100%, but both parameters ('Kit UUID', 'Absolute path') are basic. The description adds context about the upload process but does not enhance parameter semantics (e.g., allowed image types, size limits). Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the verb 'Upload' and the resource 'kit's hero/cover image', explaining its role as the top portal image for supported templates. It distinguishes from siblings like upload_kit_logo (logo) or upload_asset (general asset) by focusing on cover image and workflow.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like upload_kit_logo or upload_asset. Lacks prerequisites (e.g., image format, size limits) or conditions when not to use it. Agent must infer from context alone.

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