update-file

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

Discloses behavior beyond annotations: preserves prior revisions, returns title/URL, appears in upload log, and explains destructive nature (replaces bytes). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Concise paragraph of 5 sentences, each adding value. Front-loaded with main purpose, then side effects, restrictions, conditions, and sibling guidance. No unnecessary words.

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?

Despite no output schema, description covers return values (title, URL), side effects (history preservation, upload log), preconditions (file exists, path restrictions), and error cases. Complete for a complex tool.

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?

Adds meaningful context beyond schema: filepath must be absolute and inside configured directory; title can include or omit 'File:' prefix; comment is the reason for upload. Covered 100% schema with extra details.

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 new revision of an existing file from local disk, preserving history and returning title/URL. It differentiates from siblings like upload-file (initial upload) and update-file-from-url (remote address).

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 gives when-to-use (updating existing file), when-not-to-use (initial upload, remote address), prerequisites (filepath must be absolute inside configured directory), and contrasts with update-page for wikitext editing.

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