upload_file

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Returns status with file details, or an error,' omitting side effects, permission requirements, overwrite behavior, or file size 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?

Description is concise with two clear sentences and an Args section. No extraneous words, but could incorporate more detail without becoming verbose.

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?

For a file upload tool with 2 params, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It lacks critical details like overwrite behavior, path types (absolute/relative), size limits, and error scenarios, making it incomplete for safe usage.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description explains 'local_path' as file on local system and 'remote_path' as IFS path. This adds basic context but no format, restrictions, or examples, so it is marginally helpful.

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?

Description clearly states 'Upload a file from the local system to the IBM i,' providing a specific verb (upload), resource (file), and destination (IBM i). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'download_file'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings like 'download_file' exist, but the description does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or typical scenarios.

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