Attach uploaded files to Wiki page

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

Annotations already declare it is not read-only, is open-world, is not idempotent, and is not destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: the attachment step requires finished sessions and returns the newly-attached files. It does not cover duplicate-attachment behavior or failure modes, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 short and front-loaded: it states the action first, then the pipeline context, then the alternative and return value. Every sentence adds useful routing or prerequisite information without filler.

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?

For a 2-parameter mutation tool with full schema coverage, rich annotations, and no output schema, the description supplies the key missing context: final-step position, prerequisite finished sessions, alternative tool, and return value. Remaining gaps, such as duplicate handling and error behavior, are minor.

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 schema already documents both page_id and session_ids. The description adds little parameter-level detail beyond reinforcing that session_ids must be finished sessions, which the schema description also states. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Attach file(s) from finished upload sessions to a wiki page.' It clearly positions the tool as the final step in the upload pipeline and distinguishes it from the single-call alternative, attachments_upload.

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 gives explicit when-to-use context by naming the prior steps (uploadsessions_create, uploadsessions_parts_upload, uploadsessions_finish) and an alternative for small files: 'For one small file, attachments_upload runs the whole pipeline in a single call.' This is direct routing guidance.

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