upload_workspace_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only reveals the permission requirement but omits other behavioral traits such as whether uploads are idempotent, what happens on conflict (overwrite vs error), or any rate limits. The 100MB file size limit is in the schema but not in the description.

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: two short sentences totaling 12 words. Every word is functional. No redundant or filler content.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema and 3 parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, error handling, or behavior on duplicates. The role requirement is helpful, but critical operational details are missing for a file upload operation.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add extra context to parameters beyond the schema. The role requirement is a global constraint, not parameter-specific. No value added 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 clearly states 'Upload a file directly to a workspace' with a specific verb ('Upload') and resource ('file to workspace'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'upload_file' by specifying 'directly to a workspace', implying scope. The role requirement adds precision.

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 mentions the required role ('EDITOR or higher'), providing a prerequisite. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool (e.g., for uploading to other locations) or contrast with alternatives like 'upload_file'. Usage guidance is partial.

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