Upload a Local Path to Whatbox

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: 'without overwriting' reinforces non-destructiveness, 'Reversible' indicates undo capability, and 'checks remote free space first' reveals a safeguard. These details are not in the annotations and help the agent understand side effects and preconditions.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and includes critical constraints. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool has no output schema and minimal annotations. The description covers safety precautions but omits return values, error conditions, path interpretation, and what happens on success or failure. Given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, upload semantics), this is insufficient for an agent to invoke it reliably.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should explain parameters. It references 'local file or directory' and 'allowed remote root' but does not clarify the meaning of rootIndex or remoteRelativePath, nor provide format or examples. This is inadequate compensation for the missing schema descriptions.

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'), the resource ('local file or directory'), and the destination ('allowed remote root'). It also distinguishes this tool from siblings like download and move by specifying upload semantics and the 'without overwriting' constraint.

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: it is for uploading allowlisted local paths to an allowed remote root, with a non-destructive intent. However, it does not explicitly compare against alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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