wavexis_set_files

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

The description mentions it returns a JSON status, which adds minimal transparency. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description does not significantly expand on behavioral traits beyond stating 'upload files'. No mention of side effects, authorization needs, or file handling details.

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 short and to the point, front-loading the primary action. The Args/Returns structure is efficient, though the Returns line is redundant given the output schema.

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 has multiple parameters and a destructive nature, the description is under-specified. It lacks explanation for parameters like backend and wait_timeout, and does not clarify the output format beyond a trivial status. The presence of an output schema may reduce the burden, but the description still misses key context.

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 description only lists 'selector' and 'file paths' in a terse manner, adding little beyond the schema's own descriptions. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to elaborate on other parameters like backend, headless, session_id, or wait_timeout, leaving them unexplained.

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 uploads files to a file input element, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like wavexis_fill or wavexis_click, which handle other actions.

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 use for file uploading but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions. Usage context is clear but not elaborated.

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