build_upload_files__update

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the PATCH method and specific endpoint, implying a partial update, but does not disclose any additional behavioral context such as optional fields or error conditions. Minimal beyond annotations.

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 zero waste. Including the HTTP endpoint inline provides helpful orientation without verbosity, making it appropriately sized and 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 tool has a complex nested body and related workflow, but the description is sparse. It doesn't explain when to use this endpoint (e.g., marking a file as uploaded) or the implications of updating checksums. However, the rich schema and annotations provide enough details for a straightforward update operation, making it minimally adequate.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add extra semantics, but the schema already provides descriptions for id and body, including nested structure details, so the necessary meaning is present.

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 states 'Update a build upload file' with a clear verb ('Update') and resource, and includes the HTTP endpoint path. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that create or get build upload files.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions. The only subtle clue is the word 'update', which doesn't provide enough context to choose among similar build upload operations.

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