browser_file_upload

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action. It fails to mention that this likely involves a file chooser, that omitting 'paths' cancels the chooser (as noted in the schema), or what destructive implications might arise. No value is added beyond annotations.

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, tight sentence with no filler words. It conveys the core purpose immediately and is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Despite the schema being detailed, the description alone is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's role within the broader browser tool set. It does not explain the difference between this upload method and 'browser_upload_file_direct', nor does it mention the interactive file-chooser behavior that is central to using this tool effectively. The lack of a return-value description is acceptable given no output schema, but the tool selection guidance is 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 100%, and the schema already describes the 'paths' array, including the behavior when omitted. The description's 'one or multiple files' slightly reinforces the array semantics but does not add substantial new meaning beyond the 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 'Upload one or multiple files' clearly identifies the action (upload) and the resource (files), and it adds the scope of multiple files. However, it does not distinguish this tool from its sibling 'browser_upload_file_direct', which likely serves a similar purpose via a different mechanism.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'browser_upload_file_direct' or other browser interaction tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate context.

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