Pcloud Get Checksum

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. The word 'stored' adds useful meaning: the tool returns pCloud's precomputed checksums rather than computing them locally. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, error behavior, or whether any side effects occur.

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 concise sentence with no filler, fluff, or redundant content. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and includes the specific checksum algorithms, which is exactly what an agent needs at a glance.

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?

With a single parameter and an output schema, the tool is relatively simple. Still, the description lacks practical context such as path conventions, whether an authenticated session is required, and when to choose this tool over pcloud_get_file_info or pcloud_get_file_link. It is minimally viable but not fully complete.

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 only parameter, 'path', has no schema description. The phrase 'for a file' clarifies that the path should identify a file rather than a folder, but the description does not specify path format such as '/folder/file.txt' or that it must be a pCloud path.

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 identifies the action ('Get') and the resource ('pCloud's stored SHA256, SHA1, and MD5 checksums') along with the target ('a file'). This is specific enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like pcloud_get_file_info or pcloud_get_file_link, even without naming them.

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 only restates what the tool does and does not explain when to use it versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it, no prerequisites, and no distinction from sibling file-related tools.

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