upload_kit_logo

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that upload writes to workspace storage and sets logo_url on the kit, which is sufficient behavioral context. However, it omits details like file size limits or authorization needs.

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, each earning its place. Front-loaded with action and key distinction, no wasted words.

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?

No output schema, so description should hint at return value. It does not mention what is returned or potential errors. Also missing prerequisites like kit existence or file accessibility. Acceptable but not fully complete.

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 descriptions cover both parameters 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about the overall workflow (upload then set URL) but does not add new meaning beyond schema.

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 'Upload' and resource 'kit's main logo' and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'upload_cover_image' and the Logos block by stating it sets the kit branding logo shown in the header.

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 explains the tool's purpose and differentiates from Logos block, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like upload_cover_image or upload_asset, nor does it provide when-not-to-use criteria.

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