Upload a generation reference

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

Annotations (openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) are generic. The description adds useful behavioral details: file size limit (50 MiB), the return value (fileId), and the distinction between filePath and base64 (preferred vs fallback). This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and constraints. Every clause adds useful information—size limit, return value, when to call, and how to pass filePath. No fluff.

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 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the workflow (call before estimate/create), the accepted media types, size limit, and the two input strategies (filePath vs base64). It provides enough context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the schema already thoroughly explains each parameter. The tool description adds marginal value (e.g., emphasizing filePath for agent-window files) but does not substantially augment the schema's per-parameter guidance. Baseline of 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Upload an image, video, or audio attachment... to Deepy and return its fileId.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like deepy_list_models or deepy_estimate_generation, which serve different purposes.

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?

Explicitly states when to call: 'Call this before estimate/create and pass the returned id in referenceFiles.' It also provides context for filePath with attachments from the agent window, giving clear actionable guidance on how to supply the required input.

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