Get a file upload URL

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a genuinely non-obvious trait — the URL is one-time and the directory is appended because Wings reads the folder from the query string while the panel response ignores it. But it omits the HTTP method/headers to use against the signed URL, the expiry window, and size or path constraints, which are essential to invoke it correctly.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose; the second sentence is dense but every clause about the directory quirk earns its place. Nothing redundant.

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?

For a 6-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the definition names the return value (a signed URL) but never describes its shape or the follow-up upload steps. Adequate to identify the tool, insufficient to complete the upload flow without trial and error.

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 83%, so the schema does most of the work. The description nonetheless adds real meaning for `directory` by explaining that it is appended to the signed URL and why, which goes beyond the schema's 'Target folder, e.g. /plugins' text.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: returns a one-time signed URL for uploading files to the server. This clearly distinguishes it from files_download_url and the other file siblings, though it never explicitly names an alternative.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus files_write, files_pull, or files_download_url, and no stated prerequisites (auth, panel selection, whether the target directory must already exist). An agent must infer the whole workflow.

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