upload_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful behavior beyond schema such as FTP transfer and supported file types, but it does not mention overwrite behavior, authentication/connectivity requirements, or what happens when printing to multiple printers via 'all'.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The core action and destination are front-loaded, followed by format constraints and a clear next step. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a flat 3-parameter tool with complete schema coverage and no output schema, this is largely sufficient: action, destination, supported formats, and next step are all present. Missing error/overwrite semantics and the behavior of the 'all' printer option are notable but secondary.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by constraining local_path to supported file types and confirming the destination as an SD card, which helps the agent choose a valid file. It doesn't elaborate on remote_path formatting or multi-printer behavior, so not a 5.

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?

States 'Upload a local file to a printer's SD card via FTP', naming the verb, object, destination, and transport. The supported formats (.3mf, .gcode) and the pointer to start_print make the tool's role clear and distinguish it from download_file and other siblings.

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 provides a workflow: 'Use start_print after uploading to begin printing.' This gives clear sequential context, but it does not state when to avoid this tool or mention alternatives like send_gcode for non-file commands, preventing a 5.

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