container_archive_put

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

Discloses several behavioral details beyond the annotations: from_file is read by the server's user, ~ is expanded, and in-band data is base64-encoded. It also indicates that the operation extracts a tar archive at the given path and returns a boolean. These details align with the annotations (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false) and add operational context.

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 well-structured and dense: it front-loads the primary purpose, then adds important operational notes, and finishes with a clear args list and return type. Every sentence earns its place; there is no filler or redundancy.

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?

The description is complete for a tool with this complexity. It covers the purpose, all parameters, usage constraints, input source selection, and return value. The output schema (bool) makes the return type explicit, so no additional explanation is needed.

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 input schema has zero description coverage, but the description includes a detailed args section explaining each parameter, including the required id_or_name and path, the mutually exclusive data/from_file, and the constraint that path must already exist. This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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's function: uploading a tar archive to a path inside a container, with two possible sources. It explicitly positions itself as the inverse of container_archive_get, distinguishing it from that sibling and making its purpose unmistakable.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use each input parameter (data vs. from_file), including the recommendation to use from_file for large archives due to base64 encoding overhead. It also notes the mutual exclusivity constraint and that the destination path must already exist, offering practical usage instructions.

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