ftp_sync

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that only changed files are transferred and that ignore files are respected, but omits details on side effects (e.g., directory creation, potential deletions), permission requirements, and the upload-only direction (present in schema but not 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 three succinct sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the main purpose, explains the core mechanism, and mentions a key feature (ignore files). Every sentence earns its place.

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 schema's rich parameter descriptions (100% coverage) and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's intelligence and ignores file handling. It lacks explicit mention of dry-run and manifest features, but those are in schema. Overall, sufficient for an agent.

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 100%, so the schema already describes all parameters. The description adds value by mentioning ignore file behavior, but does not elaborate on individual parameters like dryRun or useManifest beyond what schema provides.

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 does smart synchronization for deploying entire project folders, only transferring changed files. It distinguishes from siblings like ftp_upload or ftp_deploy by emphasizing delta detection and ignore file support.

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 (e.g., ftp_upload, ftp_batch_upload). It does not specify when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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