Start CityJSON upload

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and provides almost none. It does not say what the call returns (presumably an upload identifier), whether the upload expires, what happens if it is never finished, or what permissions are needed. For a state-creating operation in a multi-step protocol this is a significant 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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, but the brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than efficiency. There is no structure such as a follow-up step or return-value note to anchor the agent.

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?

This is the entry point of a four-part upload protocol (start/chunk/finish/cancel) with two required parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The definition omits the sequencing contract, the returned handle, and any size or format constraints, leaving the agent unable to complete the workflow from this description alone.

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 0%, and the description mentions neither parameter. The agent must guess whether filename needs a path or just a basename, and whether size_bytes is used for validation or quota checks. Nothing is added beyond the bare property names.

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 names a specific verb ('Start') and resource ('an upload'), and 'from the CityJSON file picker' hints at the UI origin. However, it never states what distinguishes this from cityjson_upload_chunk, cityjson_upload_finish, or cityjson_upload itself, so an agent must infer that this is step one of a multi-part flow.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus the sibling upload tools, no mention that chunk/finish calls must follow, and no preconditions such as file type or size limits. The only usage hint is the word 'Start', which implies a sequence without describing it.

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