Upload local media

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by mentioning the return value (file_ref) and the storage backend requirement. Annotations already indicate non-readonly and non-destructive, and the description does not contradict them.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and usage guideline without extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return value (file_ref) and the purpose. It also mentions the storage backend requirement. It is fairly complete, though it omits failure conditions or size limits.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100% and the description mentions the alternative between path and bytes_base64, it does not add significant meaning beyond what is already in the parameter descriptions.

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 explicitly states 'Upload local audio/video' and explains the purpose: to get a file_ref for transcribing. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like transcribe and export_transcript.

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?

It says 'Use this when the media has no public URL', providing a clear usage context. It also mentions the requirement for the Pepys R2 storage backend. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives.

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