jira_jira_upload_attachment

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: files are removed after successful upload, unused uploads expire after 30 minutes, and upload is direct via REST API with no base64 overhead. Also notes error conditions (read-only mode, client unavailability).

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, with a clear opening sentence followed by contextual details, parameter descriptions, and return/error information. No superfluous content.

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 presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers input, process, side effects, and errors. It provides a complete picture for a tool within a larger workflow.

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?

While the input schema already documents parameters with examples, the description adds meaning by explaining that 'upload:// URIs are resolved from the server-side staging store' and are 'from the /upload endpoint response', enhancing understanding beyond the schema's coverage.

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 purpose: 'Upload one or more staged files to a Jira issue as attachments.' It identifies the tool as step 3 of a multi-step flow, distinguishing it from related tools like jira_construct_upload_endpoint.

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 places the tool in context: 'This is step 3 of the client-side file upload flow (after construct_upload_endpoint and POSTing files to /upload).' It explains that staged files are removed after success and expire after 30 minutes, guiding the agent on proper sequencing.

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