arvan_s3_put_object

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

Annotations indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) but not destructive or idempotent. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as whether existing objects are overwritten, size limits, or authentication requirements, leaving significant ambiguity.

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 structured with an 'Args' block, making it easy to parse. However, the opening line 'Upload an object.' could be more informative by specifying the target (e.g., S3 bucket). Overall, it is concise but could be more front-loaded.

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 return value information and does not mention preconditions like bucket existence or behavior on key conflict. While parameter details are strong, the absence of output schema and behavioral traits reduces completeness for a write operation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining all 6 parameters. It clarifies the relationship between content and content_base64, provides examples for content_type and acl, and adds meaning beyond the schema titles.

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 'Upload an object', which is a specific verb and resource. It effectively distinguishes the tool from sibling S3 operations like delete, copy, or get objects by focusing on the upload action.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as arvan_s3_sync_local_dir or arvan_s3_copy_object. There is no mention of prerequisites or typical use cases, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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