x_api_finalize_media_upload

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It clearly warns 'Risk: mutating, high-risk' and 'Safety warnings: This mutates X state,' along with required OAuth scopes, environment-selection behavior, common failure conditions, and expected response shape. This exceeds what annotations would typically provide.

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 organized into labeled sections (Risk, Permissions, Environment-selection, Parameter formats, Response, Failure conditions, Prerequisites, Safety, Example), making it highly readable. The 'Use when: Finalize Media upload' line is redundant, but the rest is information-dense without excessive verbosity.

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 tool's complexity and lack of output schema, the description provides expected response shape, failure conditions, prerequisites, and safety warnings. It lacks explicit sequencing with sibling upload tools (e.g., 'call after append_media_upload'), which would improve completeness for an agent navigating the upload workflow.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does for many parameters: explains scopeTenantId, scopeUserId, scopeAccountId, and credentialKey in the environment-selection behavior, and references authorizationKey in safety warnings. However, it does not explain preferredAuthType or provide structured detail for all 7 parameters, leaving some gaps.

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 opens with 'Finalize Media upload,' a specific verb+resource phrase that clearly identifies the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from sibling upload tools (initialize, append, get status) by using 'finalize,' which denotes the completion step of a multipart upload.

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?

It provides a 'Use when' clause that simply restates the tool name ('Finalize Media upload') and a 'Do not use when' clause that is generic to exploration/auth setup, naming x_schema_discovery and x_query_suggestion. It lacks explicit guidance on how this tool fits into the upload workflow relative to siblings like x_api_initialize_media_upload or x_api_append_media_upload, so the when-to-use guidance is only implied.

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