Upload AI Pack preview image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses accepted file formats and that the image is local, but it does not mention whether an existing preview image is overwritten, whether the pack must be in a draft state, what succeeds/fails look like, or any size/validation limits.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every phrase adds useful information: 'one', 'explicit local', the format list, and 'seller-owned pack listing'.

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 description is adequate for a simple 2-parameter upload tool, and the parameter schema plus format list cover the core invocation details. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it omits return value expectations, overwrite behavior, and ownership validation steps, leaving minor but real gaps for an agent deciding whether the call succeeded.

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 schema covers productId with a description, but imagePath is only typed as a string. The description compensates by specifying accepted formats (JPEG, PNG, WebP, AVIF) and 'local' path semantics, adding meaningful detail to imagePath. It does not explicitly map the formats to imagePath, but the inference is straightforward.

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 uses a specific verb ('Upload') and resource ('preview image to seller-owned pack listing'), and scopes the operation to image formats only, clearly distinguishing it from the sibling 'upload_ai_pack'. The phrase 'seller-owned' also sets expectations about authorization context.

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 the tool is for uploading a preview image to a pack listing, and the 'seller-owned' qualifier gives some context about when it applies. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives such as 'upload_ai_pack' or state when not to use this tool, leaving some routing work to the agent.

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