upload_project_file

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

With no annotations and a minimal description, there is no disclosure of behavioral traits such as whether the upload overwrites existing files, required permissions, size limits, or side effects. The description fails to provide any behavioral context.

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 extremely concise, but at the expense of informativeness. A single phrase does not earn its place as it provides minimal guidance. This is under-specification rather than efficient brevity.

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?

Given the tool has 4 required parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain return values, side effects, or how to use the tool effectively.

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% with basic Chinese descriptions for each parameter (e.g., '文件路径' for file_path). However, these descriptions add little value beyond the parameter names themselves. The tool description does not further clarify parameter semantics.

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 '上传项目文件' (upload project file) provides a clear verb and resource, but it is very brief and does not distinguish the tool from siblings like 'file_add' or 'delete_project_file'. It lacks specificity about what 'upload' entails.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'file_add' or 'download_target_file', nor does it mention any prerequisites or context.

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