ksef_batch_send_part

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds prerequisite context about the active KSeF session and open batch session, which is useful beyond the annotation, but it does not disclose other behavioral details such as idempotency, failure semantics, or side effects of uploading a part.

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?

A single Polish sentence conveys the action, the object, the source of the URL, and the prerequisites with no wasted words. The key identifying information is 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 captures the essential prerequisites and source of the upload URL, but the tool has 6 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema. It does not clarify the full batch workflow sequence (e.g., that this must happen between ksef_batch_open and ksef_batch_close, or that uploadHeaders typically come from partUploadRequests), so an agent may still need to infer important operational details.

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 adds value by clarifying that uploadUrl must come from ksef_batch_open and that the request concerns a single part of a batch, which helps an agent understand how referenceNumber, ordinalNumber, and uploadUrl interrelate. It does not explain uploadMethod or uploadHeaders, but those are already well documented in the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Wyślij') with a specific resource ('część paczki') and destination ('pre-signed URL'), and explicitly ties the URL to a sibling tool (ksef_batch_open). This clearly distinguishes it from batch management siblings like ksef_batch_open, ksef_batch_close, and ksef_batch_status.

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 gives clear contextual prerequisites: an active KSeF session and an open batch session, and it references ksef_batch_open as the source of the upload URL. It implies the correct position in the batch lifecycle, though it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or name alternatives.

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