upload_file

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, but it only states the action without describing side effects (e.g., whether it waits for upload completion, error handling, or interaction with the page state). The behavioral traits remain opaque.

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 a single, brief sentence with no extraneous information. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could include slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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?

The description lacks context about the environment (browser automation), the interaction model (does it simulate a click and file selection?), and does not reference the output schema (exists but unused). For a tool with no annotations and sparse schema, the description is too incomplete to fully inform an agent.

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 0%, and the description does not explain what 'selector' and 'file_path' mean beyond their names. No details on expected format (absolute path, relative, URL) or how the selector is used (CSS selector, XPath, etc.). The description adds no value to the parameter 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 clearly indicates the action 'Upload a file' and the target 'a file input', which is specific enough given the sibling tools are browser automation tools. However, it does not specify the type of file input (e.g., HTML <input type='file'>) or the platform scope (browser context is implied by siblings but not explicit).

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives like fill_form or type_text, nor any prerequisites (e.g., file existence, path format). The agent receives no guidance on appropriate scenarios.

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