elster_beleg_upload

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the accepted formats, the 10 MB cap, and crucially that it 'Stores a document in the account; submits nothing' – an important side-effect distinction given the sibling submission tools. However it omits session/auth requirements, duplicate-handling, and what is returned.

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?

Front-loads the core action and constraints, then gives the belegart mapping examples. The example list is dense but earns its place by encoding the nested-key contract; nothing is gratuitously verbose.

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 7-parameter tool with a nested object and no output schema, the description covers the central belegart/fields mapping well but leaves required 'year' and 'stichwoerter' unexplained, and never states what the call returns or whether a login is required.

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 coverage is only 43% (low), so the description must compensate. It does meaningfully, explaining the belegart path syntax ('N/Arbeitsmittel') and which field keys map to each line (Art_der_Arbeitsmittel, Betrag, etc.) plus the Betrag numeric format. It does not clarify year, stichwoerter, or label beyond the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Uploads one receipt file') plus the destination ('Meine Belege'), and its tagging purpose. An agent can distinguish it from the reading-oriented elster_belege_list sibling without opening either schema.

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?

Gives usage context ('Receipts are optional for the ESt (Belegvorhaltepflicht) but can avoid queries'), which tells the agent why and when this tool is worth calling. It does not name alternative tools or explicit exclusions, but the context is clear.

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