s3_abort_multipart_upload

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's core safety profile is covered. The phrase 'release all associated storage' adds a useful consequence, but the description does not elaborate on irreversibility or the idempotent behavior beyond what annotations provide.

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?

A single sentence that is direct, front-loaded with the verb and object, and contains no filler or redundant phrasing. It conveys the essential information efficiently.

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 annotations and full schema coverage, the description is largely complete for a destructive operation. It states the primary effect and the annotations cover safety semantics. It does not mention the confirm parameter's fallback behavior, but the schema already describes it, so the description need not repeat it.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already documents for bucket, key, and uploadId.

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 ('Abort'), the specific resource ('in-progress S3-compatible multipart upload'), and the consequence ('release all associated storage'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like s3_complete_multipart_upload and s3_create_multipart_upload without ambiguity.

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 implies this tool is for canceling an in-progress upload rather than completing it, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The context is clear enough for an agent to infer the primary use case, but explicit routing guidance is missing.

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