upload_print_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses two key facts — the print is NOT started and an upload ID is returned — but omits auth requirements, storage location, and overwrite/duplicate handling, leaving meaningful gaps for an upload mutation.

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?

A single tightly-worded sentence with the non-start constraint and return value front-loaded. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return value ('upload ID') need not be explained, though the description mentions it anyway. The remaining adequacy gap is the undocumented 'path' parameter plus no annotation coverage; the core purpose is otherwise clear.

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 single 'path' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never explains it (remote path? local file? filename only?). The description gives upload context but does not compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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+resource ('Upload G-code to Moonraker') and immediately scopes it with 'without starting the printer', which cleanly separates it from the sibling start_uploaded_print. An agent can distinguish its role without opening any 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?

The clause 'without starting the printer' conveys the when-not condition and implicitly routes the agent to start_uploaded_print for the actual print step. It does not explicitly name that alternative or state prerequisites, so it stops short of a 5.

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