upload_object

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=true, indicating safe retries. The description adds that it uploads 'files' to 'Object Store', implying a write operation, which aligns with the tool name. However, it doesn't disclose rate limits, permissions needed, or what happens on conflict (e.g., overwrite behavior), leaving behavioral gaps despite 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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 1 parameter with 0% schema coverage, no output schema details provided, and annotations limited to idempotency, the description is minimal. It states the purpose but lacks context on parameters, error handling, or integration with siblings like delete_object. For a write tool, more behavioral context would improve completeness.

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 0%, but the input schema defines 'model' with nested properties (organizationId, key, objectData). The description doesn't explain these parameters at all, offering no semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the full parameter documentation burden.

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 'Upload files to the Object Store' clearly states the action (upload) and target resource (Object Store files). It distinguishes from siblings like 'delete_object' and 'list_object_store_files', but doesn't specify file types or constraints beyond the generic term 'files'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites like authentication, file size limits, or when to choose upload_object over other file-related tools like create_file. The description assumes context without providing usage boundaries.

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