Recursively upload a local directory (SFTP)

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral transparency. It discloses two key behaviors: excludes are not hardcoded, and symlinks are not followed by default. However, it omits other important behaviors like overwrite policy, error handling, or the need for a prior connection, which leaves gaps.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences. It front-loads the main action and includes critical details without any fluff, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description provides the most essential context (recursive upload, excludes, symlinks) but misses details like the role of connectionName, whether mkdirParents is automatic, and what happens on error. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 only 17% (only 'exclude' has a description). The description adds semantic value for 'exclude' and 'followSymlinks', but the remaining 4 parameters (localPath, remotePath, connectionName, mkdirParents) receive no additional explanation beyond their names, which is insufficient given the low coverage.

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: recursively upload a local directory tree via SFTP. It specifies the resource (local directory tree) and method (SFTP), distinguishing it from sibling tools like upload_file that handle single files.

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 implicit guidance by noting that excludes are caller-supplied and symlinks are not followed unless requested. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like upload_file, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing an active connection.

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