Upload a local file to the remote host (SFTP)

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only notes that paths come from arguments and are not hardcoded. Missing critical details: whether existing files are overwritten, what happens on failure, permission handling, or if the tool is idempotent.

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 concise with two front-loaded sentences. Every word adds value, but there is room to include more behavioral details 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?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and sibling tools, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain the return value (e.g., success/failure), prerequisites (e.g., need for a connection), or effects like overwriting. The tool is a mutation, yet behavioral context is minimal.

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 high (80%), so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only reinforcing that paths are from arguments. It does not clarify the purpose of 'mode' or 'mkdirParents' beyond the schema, nor does it describe the undocumented 'connectionName' parameter.

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 ('Upload') and resource ('single local file'), specifying the method (SFTP). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'upload_directory' by mentioning 'single local file', but does not explicitly contrast with other related tools like 'write_remote_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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., an active connection), when not to use it (e.g., for directories), or refer to sibling tools like 'upload_directory' or 'write_remote_file'.

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