transfer_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It describes the transfer action and parameters but does not disclose potential side effects, authorization requirements, or error behavior (e.g., overwrite policy).

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 very concise, using a single-line summary followed by a bulleted list of parameters. 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?

Given the presence of an output schema (details not shown), the description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers the transfer direction, path conventions, and flags, adequately informing usage for a straightforward file transfer 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining the prefix convention for source/destination and the meaning of 'recursive' and 'parents'. This adds critical context beyond the basic schema.

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: 'Transfer files/directories between the host and Multipass instances.' This specific verb+resource definition distinguishes it from siblings like 'mount_directory', which handles mounting rather than copying.

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 clear guidance on how to use the tool, including the prefix convention for Multipass instance paths and the meaning of boolean flags. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., mount_directory) or when not to use it.

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