velixar_upload

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses that files are parsed, chunked, and tagged with source metadata, but does not cover side effects (e.g., overwrites, storage limits), error conditions, or access requirements.

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?

Two sentences efficiently convey purpose, supported formats, and processing. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 explains what happens to the uploaded file and covers the key parameters. However, it omits what the tool returns (e.g., confirmation, memory ID) since no output schema is provided, which is a minor gap for an upload 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and parameter descriptions are clear. The description adds that files are 'tagged with source metadata' which loosely relates to the tags parameter, but does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema already states.

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's purpose: uploading a file into Velixar memory with full source provenance. It enumerates supported file types and outlines the processing steps (parsed, chunked, tagged), distinguishing it from related tools like velixar_store or velixar_update.

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 usage for single file uploads with provenance tracking but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Alternatives like velixar_batch_store or velixar_update are not mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context.

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