put_container_archive_from_file

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

Annotations indicate mutation but not destructiveness; description adds context about server-side file reading, ~ expansion, and streaming, which is beyond the 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?

Concise description with front-loaded main action and structured args/returns, though slightly verbose in streaming rationale; no wasted sentences.

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?

Complete for a simple tool: covers what it does, when to use (large archives), parameters, return type, and important notes (path existence, ~ expansion).

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description provides brief explanations for each parameter (id_or_name, path, file_path) including constraints like path must exist and file_path is server-side with ~ expansion.

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 tool uploads a tar archive from a server host file to a container path, distinguishing it from put_container_archive by emphasizing streaming for large archives.

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?

Explicitly mentions it handles large archives that are impractical in-band via put_container_archive, providing a clear use case but no explicit when-not-to-use scenarios.

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