upload_knowledge_document

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only describes the basic upload action and lists parameters, without noting side effects (e.g., overwriting existing documents), authentication needs, rate limits, or success/failure behavior.

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 with a single-sentence overview followed by a clear bulleted list of parameters. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description provides no information about return values, error handling, or what happens on conflicts (e.g., duplicate names). For a mutation tool, this is insufficient for an agent to understand the full impact of the operation.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description provides meaningful context: 'The UUID of the knowledge group' for group_id, 'Document name' for name, 'Document content (text)' for content, and 'MIME type (default: text/plain)' for content_type. This adds value beyond the schema's titles and types, though it lacks constraints or examples.

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 'Upload a document to a knowledge group' with a specific verb and resource. Among siblings like create_knowledge_folder or update_knowledge_document, this uniquely identifies the action of adding a new document to a group.

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 such as update_knowledge_document or delete_knowledge_document. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or best practices for choosing this tool.

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