upload_dashboard_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool uploads a file to S3, implying a write operation, but lacks details on permissions required, whether it overwrites existing files, error handling, rate limits, or authentication needs (though the input schema hints at credentials). This leaves behavioral traits largely undisclosed.

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, efficient sentence in Chinese that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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's complexity (file upload to S3 with credentials and workspace context), no annotations, and an output schema present (which likely covers return values), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks behavioral details and usage context, leaving gaps in completeness for an 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?

The description mentions '指定工作空间' (specified workspace) and implies a file upload, but doesn't detail parameters beyond that. With 0% schema description coverage, the input schema fully documents the single parameter 'cfg' and its nested properties (e.g., workspace_name, local_file_path, credentials). The description adds minimal value over the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles most 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 clearly states the action ('上传' meaning 'upload') and the resource ('__dashboard__.md文件' meaning '__dashboard__.md file') with the destination ('指定工作空间的S3桶' meaning 'specified workspace's S3 bucket'). It's specific about what gets uploaded and where, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'export_bioos_workspace' or 'import_workflow' which might involve file operations.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a workspace or file), exclusions, or compare to sibling tools like 'export_bioos_workspace' for downloading or 'import_workflow' for other file imports. Usage is implied only by the action itself.

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