alm_attach_to_entity

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

The description discloses the return format and the upload action, but no annotations exist to supplement. It omits details on permissions, file size limits, error handling, or side effects like overwriting existing attachments, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses a structured format with bullet points for args and a return specification. Every sentence adds value, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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 tool's complexity (multiple entity types) and lack of output schema, the description covers parameter details and return format well, and even references a sibling tool for run-step IDs. It misses error scenarios and idempotency, but overall is fairly 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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: entity_type lists valid values with context, entity_id specifies numeric ALM ID and special case for run-steps, file_path requires absolute path with an example, significantly enhancing schema meaning.

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' and the resource 'local file as an attachment to any ALM entity', distinguishing it from sibling tools which are primarily CRUD or search operations.

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 provides specific guidance for each entity_type, including the relationship between run-step and run entities, and references alm_get_run_steps for obtaining IDs. However, it lacks explicit instructions on when not to use this tool or alternatives.

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