Create Article Attachment

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

Description discloses non-idempotency, which is critical beyond annotations. Annotations only show idempotentHint=false, but description explains the behavior (each call uploads another copy). Also mentions return value contents.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose and returns, second explains non-idempotency, third provides sibling differentiation.

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 no output schema, description adequately covers return values. It could mention potential size limits or authorization, but overall complete for a create attachment tool.

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 schema already describes parameters well. Description adds no additional parameter details beyond the return value fields. Baseline 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?

Description explicitly states 'Upload a file to a Help Center article and return the created attachment', with specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by naming get_ticket_attachments and list_article_attachments.

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?

Clear guidance on when to use this tool (for article assets) and when not (for support tickets, use get_ticket_attachments; to view existing attachments, use list_article_attachments).

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