smokeball_get_file_upload_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions routing and scope (JWT, tenant, company) but does not state if this is a read/write operation, required permissions, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. This is minimal.

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 4 sentences, but the first sentence is somewhat redundant (stating the tool name twice). It includes operational routing details that may not be essential. Could be more concise and 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no annotations, output schema present), the description provides minimal context. It explains the routing and scope but does not clarify how the returned URL is used or what the operation accomplishes beyond the name. The output schema may cover return values, but the description remains incomplete for usage context.

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 has only one parameter ('arguments') with 0% schema description coverage. The description says 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation' but does not explain what the arguments should contain, leaving the agent without necessary details to construct valid input.

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's operation (`get_file_upload_url`) and its Smokeball connector context. It also explains the routing and scope. However, it could be more explicit about the purpose (e.g., 'Gets a URL for uploading a file') and does not differentiate from siblings like `smokeball_get_file_download_url`.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., `smokeball_get_file_download_url`, `smokeball_get_file`). It lacks context for selection, such as prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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