Create Design Asset Version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states mutation ('upload as new version') without disclosing permissions, side effects on previous versions, rate limits, or relationships between optional parameters (e.g., textContent vs contentBase64).

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, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the core action and resource. No unnecessary words or details.

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 high parameter count (11) and no output schema or annotations, the description provides minimal context. It omits return behavior, required preconditions (e.g., asset must exist), constraints on parameter combinations, and typical use cases.

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%, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds the notion of 'inline text or base64 content' which loosely maps to textContent and contentBase64, but provides no additional meaning beyond what the schema states.

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 verb 'upload' and the resource 'new version of an existing uploaded design asset', specifying inline text or base64 content. It distinguishes from sibling 'create_design_asset_upload' by focusing on version creation, but does not explicitly name the alternative.

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 usage when inline text or base64 content needs to be added as a new version. However, it provides no guidance on when not to use this tool (e.g., for new assets) and does not mention sibling alternatives.

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