Datei hochladen (mit Beweis)

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds significant context: the transfer verdict mechanism and the condition for PROVEN status. It does not contradict annotations and clarifies behavioral expectations beyond what annotations offer.

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 is concise and front-loaded with the primary action. It could be slightly more structured but is efficient and focused.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality but lacks details on return values, error conditions, and behavior for non-hash proof levels. It is not fully 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions SHA-256 proof, which relates to the proof parameter but does not add explicit meaning beyond the enum values. No additional parameter semantics are provided.

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 verb (upload), the resource (local file), and a unique behavioral trait (verdict based on SHA-256 match). It distinguishes from sibling tools like silicon_upload_dir and silicon_download_file.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide usage scenarios. It implies file upload with integrity check but offers no comparison with other uploading tools or guidance on when to choose different proof levels.

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