yoto-upload-audio

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic upload-and-create action, but does not mention side effects, authentication requirements, file format constraints beyond MP3, or what happens on conflict or failure.

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, succinct sentence that effectively captures the core function. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler words.

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?

Despite the low complexity (2 simple parameters, no output schema), the description lacks important context such as authentication prerequisites (sibling tools include yoto-auth and yoto-check-auth), any side effects, or expected return behavior. It is minimally adequate but leaves gaps for an AI 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 100%, with both parameters (title, audioFilePath) already described in the schema. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 tool's action with a specific verb ('Upload') and resource ('audio file to Yoto') and indicates the outcome ('create a new MYO card'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like yoto-list-cards and yoto-check-auth, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from yoto-add-track.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., yoto-add-track). The description does not mention prerequisites like authentication or context such as needing to create a new MYO card versus adding a track to an existing card.

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