Upload File

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'overwrites,' which is a key destructive behavior, and 'mock file system' sets expectations about the environment. It doesn't mention other side effects (e.g., permission checks, parent directory creation), but for a simple tool, the overwrite disclosure is valuable.

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 two concise sentences. The first states the purpose and behavior, the second tells the user what to provide. No redundant words or filler.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, the overwrite behavior, and the required inputs. It lacks details on return values or error behavior, but the tool's simplicity and the mock-file-system context make it reasonably complete.

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 covers both parameters fully (100% coverage) with descriptions for path and content. The description's instruction to 'Specify the full path and content' adds minimal value beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 function: 'Creates or overwrites a file in the mock file system.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from siblings like read_file and list_files by focusing on file creation/overwrite.

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 implies when to use the tool (when creating or overwriting a file), but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives. It's clear enough for the simple use case, but lacks the explicit context and exclusions seen in high-scoring examples.

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