Create Wiki upload session

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false, so the write profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the return contract (the returned session_id addresses the session) which is essential since there is no output schema. It omits session lifetime/expiry and any permission requirements, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Two sentences, no waste, and the pipeline position is front-loaded before the alternative routing. Every clause carries load.

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 session-creating write tool with a nested body and no output schema, the description compensates by explaining what the call returns and how it connects to follow-up tools. It stops short of covering session lifetime or auth needs, a minor gap given the annotations and 100% schema coverage.

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% and the nested body fields (file_name, file_size) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no format or constraint detail for the body beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is correct.

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?

States a specific verb ('Open an upload session') and resource with explicit scope: 'step 1 of the Wiki file-upload pipeline'. It names the downstream siblings (parts_upload, finish) and the shortcut alternative (attachments_upload), so an agent can place it in the pipeline without opening any schema.

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?

Gives explicit routing: use this to start a session that later calls parts_upload/finish, but use attachments_upload when handling a single small file in one call. The alternative and the condition that selects it are both stated, not inferred.

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