upload_group_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It reveals only that this maps to a NapCat OneBot 11 action and that omitting folder targets the root directory; it says nothing about required bot permissions, file size limits, overwrite/duplicate-name behavior, or what happens on failure — all material for an upload mutation.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one sentence followed by a compact param list; nothing is padded. The param lines are redundant with the schema, which slightly dilutes the value but not the readability.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers inputs adequately but omits return information (file id/message id) and failure modes. It is minimally viable rather than complete.

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 the description's param list is a verbatim restatement of the schema (group_id, file_path, file_name, folder), adding no format or constraint detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema already documents every parameter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('向指定 QQ 群上传群文件') plus the underlying NapCat OneBot 11 action name, so the operation is unambiguous. However, it never names its closest sibling upload_private_file (or delete_group_file / get_group_file_url), so the agent must infer the group-vs-private distinction from the tool name alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no comparison to the many adjacent file tools in the sibling list. The only usage hint is that folder is optional and defaults to the group root.

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