Upload Document

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) but no destructive or idempotent behavior. Description adds useful behavioral context: the document is automatically chunked and indexed. This goes beyond annotations and provides key processing details. No contradictions.

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 sentence with a clear, concise structure. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, followed by the key processing outcome. No wasted 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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and processing. It could mention return value or prerequisites (e.g., knowledge base must exist), but for a simple upload tool it is fairly complete. No missing critical context.

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 each parameter having a clear description in the schema (id, folder, content, filename). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the action (upload), resource (text document to a knowledge base), and the automatic processing (chunked and indexed for semantic search). It distinguishes from similar tools like neuron_create_kb_entry by emphasizing automatic chunking and indexing.

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?

Description provides clear context for when to use this tool (uploading a text document for semantic search), but does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with alternatives. Thus it scores 4 per rubric: clear context, no exclusions.

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