upload_media

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action (upload/fetch) and return value, omitting side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or destruction implications. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the main action and return value. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, though it could be restructured to include more details without losing conciseness.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to describe parameters, expected output format beyond a path, or behavioral traits. A user would need external documentation to use the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It vaguely maps 'local file' to the 'file' parameter and 'remote URL' to the 'url' parameter, but does not explain the meaning of 'subdir', the expected format of 'file', or any constraints. Minimal value added beyond schema names.

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 purpose: uploading a local file or fetching a remote URL, and returning a storage URL. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which focus on sessions, solutions, and stories, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage for populating hero_image or media arrays but provides no explicit guidance on when to use local file vs URL, which subdir to choose, or when not to use this tool. While context is clear, it lacks exclusions or alternatives.

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