Publish an existing upload

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

Annotations already declare it is a non-destructive, non-idempotent write operation with open-world access. The description adds useful behavioral context: it is a recovery tool that avoids re-sending the archive and requires state=available before running. It does not cover permissions or failure modes, but with annotations carrying the safety profile, this is meaningfully beyond structured data.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the recovery purpose, followed by usage and precondition. Every sentence adds distinct value with no repetition or filler.

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 high-complexity mutation tool with 14 parameters and low schema coverage, the description adequately covers purpose and usage but leaves most parameter semantics and invocation details to an under-documented schema. It is minimally viable but has clear gaps.

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 only 29% across 14 parameters, so the description should compensate heavily but does not. It mentions upload_id only implicitly and gives no meaning for name, version, file_category, or the many optional flags.

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 (turns) and resource (finalised upload_id into mod file/new version), and distinguishes itself from nexus_upload_mod_file as a recovery/publishing step. An agent can tell it apart from upload and status siblings immediately.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it: after nexus_upload_mod_file uploaded bytes but publishing failed, or when the upload was still processing. It also names a required precondition: check nexus_upload_status shows state=available first.

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