upload_video

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully convey behavior. It states the endpoint and that the stored filename is returned. However, it lacks details about error handling, file overwrite behavior, size limits, or required permissions, which would be valuable for a complete understanding.

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, each providing critical information without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the main action and efficiently adds details and alternatives.

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 the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, parameters, and usage context. It could mention error conditions or file handling nuances, but it is largely sufficient for an upload 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 input schema has 100% coverage, and the description adds explanatory context: 'Auto-detected from source path if omitted' for filename and 'Absolute path to the local file to upload' for source_path. This enhances understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 verb 'Upload', the resource 'local video file', the target directory and endpoint, and the intended use with video-loading nodes. It also explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools upload_image and upload_audio.

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 mentions that it works for both local and remote ComfyUI, and specifies alternative tools for images and audio. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or any prerequisites, but the context is clear enough for most use cases.

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