_mcp_upload_deliverable

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It accurately states the dry-run default and the condition for actual upload (FTOS_SFTP_* configured). This is critical for an agent to understand the tool's behavior. Missing details like error handling or idempotency are acceptable for a simple upload tool.

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 description is a single sentence that front-loads the core action and includes a key condition. Every word earns its place; no filler or unnecessary detail. Perfectly concise.

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?

The tool has two parameters and an output schema (not shown but present). The description does not explain the input file format, remote path behavior, or success/error outputs. While the output schema may compensate, the description itself leaves some gaps about what constitutes a valid upload. Adequate but not thorough.

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%, meaning the input schema has no descriptions for its two parameters ('path' and 'destination'). The tool description adds zero information about these parameters—it does not explain what 'path' refers to (local file?), or what 'destination' means (remote directory?). Thus minimal value.

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 states the action: 'Upload encrypted deliverable over SFTP'. The verb 'upload' and resource 'encrypted deliverable' are specific, and the protocol is specified. The conditional 'dry_run unless FTOS_SFTP_* configured' adds helpful nuance, distinguishing it from sibling tools like _mcp_encrypt_deliverable.

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 when to use: to upload a deliverable, but it warns that it will dry-run unless environment variables are set. This gives clear context about prerequisites. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternative tools.

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