create-upload-session

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

The description goes beyond annotations by explaining that the tool returns an upload URL for direct PUT of file bytes and mentions the optional conflict behavior. However, it lacks details on session expiration, permissions, or idempotency, which are relevant given the destructiveHint annotation.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence and a bulleted tip, yet covers the essential aspects. Every part serves a purpose without unnecessary words.

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?

Provided the complexity and lack of output schema, the description covers the core functionality, return type, and body format. It omits details on includeHeaders and excludeResponse parameters, but overall it is fairly complete for a session-creation tool.

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 description clarifies the body parameter structure with an example for conflict behavior, adding value beyond the schema's basic descriptions. For driveId and driveItemId, it does not add much, but the 80% schema coverage provides baseline documentation.

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 is for creating an upload session for large files, with specific usage examples and the return of a pre-authenticated URL. It distinguishes itself from other upload-related sibling tools like 'upload-file-content' by explicitly mentioning large file support and no size limit.

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 includes a tip for large file uploads and provides a specific path format for new files, giving clear cues on when to use. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, the guidance is sufficient for proper selection among siblings.

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