ftrack_complete_multipart_upload

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool completes a multipart upload but does not explain side effects, idempotency, error behavior, or the outcome if parts are missing. For a mutation action, this is a significant transparency gap.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and condition. Every word contributes meaning with no filler or redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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 tool is simple with well-described schema parameters and a key precondition in the description. However, with no output schema and no details about return values or failure modes, the description is not fully complete for an agent that needs to handle outcomes. It is minimally viable but leaves some gaps.

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% with all three parameters (component_id, upload_id, parts) clearly described. The description does not add any parameter-specific details beyond the action, so the schema fully handles parameter semantics. A baseline 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 action ('Complete') and the resource ('a multipart upload'), along with the precondition that all parts have been uploaded. It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling upload-related tools, though it does not explicitly name alternatives, preventing a 5.

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 an explicit condition for use: 'after all parts have been uploaded'. This gives the agent clear context on when to invoke the tool. However, it does not mention any when-not-to-use scenarios or alternative tools, so it lacks full exclusion guidance.

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