upload_resume_from_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses useful limitations (max 5MB, file types) and default behavior (profile syncing), but omits important side effects such as whether the upload replaces the primary resume when isAltResume is false. This is a notable gap 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 three concise sentences with no filler. It front-loads the main purpose in the first sentence, then adds constraints and default behavior. Every sentence contributes information.

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 key constraints (file path, types, size) and default sync behavior, but it does not explain the replacement behavior when isAltResume is false, nor what the tool returns on success. Given no annotations and no output schema, these gaps make it only partially complete for an agent making decisions.

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 input schema already describes all three parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by specifying file type constraints and the 5MB size limit for filePath, which are not present in the schema. This additional semantic context justifies a 4.

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 action ('Upload a resume') and the source ('from a file on the user's local machine'), using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'upload_resume_from_url' by explicitly limiting to local file paths, and lists supported file types.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: when the resume is a local file. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the phrase 'Provide the absolute file path' makes the usage context unambiguous. A comparison with upload_resume_from_url would have been helpful but is not required for basic usage.

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