Upload an object to Scaleway Object Storage

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

The description discloses the overwrite behavior and single-part limitation, which are not captured by the annotations alone. It also points to additional constraints (size, encoding) in the content field, adding context beyond the readOnly/idempotent/destructive flags.

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 two sentences, action-first, and zero fluff. It states the primary purpose, then a key constraint, then an efficient pointer to further details.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scoping, and key constraints via pointer. It does not mention return values or error handling, but the rich schema and annotations compensate, making it sufficiently complete for selection and 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and each parameter has detailed semantics (e.g., content size cap, base64 encoding, region default). The description only references the content field, so it adds no new parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states 'Upload (or overwrite) a single object' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like copy/delete/list by emphasizing 'single-part only' and pointing to the content field for size/encoding constraints.

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 clearly excludes multipart with 'Single-part only' and directs users to the 'content' field for the size ceiling and encoding, which in the schema explains that larger files should go through the console or scw CLI. The alternative guidance is available but not in the main description itself.

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