upload_local_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions 'blocking', a size threshold, and timeout risk. However, it does not describe return values or error handling, leaving a slight gap in transparency.

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 concise and well-structured: a purpose statement, usage guidance, then a clean parameter list. Every sentence adds value, and key info is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, and all parameters, which is sufficient for a simple upload tool. It lacks explicit return-value or error-info, but given the tool's simplicity and no output schema, the completeness is strong but not perfect.

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 schema has zero descriptions for parameters, but the description explains local_path (absolute path), disk_path (destination with example), and overwrite (overwrite if exists). This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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 a local file to Yandex Disk and specifies it is blocking, distinguishing it from the sibling upload_local_file_background. The verb 'upload' and resource are explicit and 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?

It explicitly says to use for files under ~100 MB and directs users to upload_local_file_background for large files to avoid timeout. This provides clear when-to-use and alternative guidance.

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