Invoke Uploads Complete

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

The description reveals key behaviors: synchronous creation of records, asynchronous best-effort pipeline, and deferral mechanism. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) are consistent, and the description adds context 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 concise (three sentences) and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value, and technical terms are explained.

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 information about return values (no output schema) and does not cover the two parameters. It adequately explains the process but is incomplete for agent invocation.

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 must document parameters, but it fails to mention 'x-api-key' or 'body' at all. This is a critical gap for correct usage.

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 the tool's function: 'Complete an upload' and explains what happens synchronously (creates item/asset records and provenance) and asynchronously (schedules post-upload pipeline). It distinguishes itself from sibling upload tools like uploads.initiate or uploads.fail.

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 implies this is the final step after uploads are fully transferred, mentioning deferral similar to legacy BackgroundTasks. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or comparison with uploads.fail or uploads.progress.

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