upload

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the copy direction and return value (confirmation with file count and size) but does not mention overwrite behavior, permissions, error handling, or limitations. More behavioral detail would improve transparency.

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 concise, using an Args/Returns format. It front-loads the purpose and contains no unnecessary words. 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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers input parameters and return value adequately. Missing details like overwrite behavior or error cases, but overall sufficient for a basic copy 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: local_path (absolute path), sandbox_path (destination, default /workspace), sandbox (name, default 'default'). This adds critical meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 'Copy a file or directory from the host into the sandbox,' which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like download (reverse direction) and write_file (writing content).

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 explains parameters but does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives. It implies usage for copying files into the sandbox but lacks context on when not to use it or how it differs from similar tools like write_file.

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