site_files_upload

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: SSH transfer, chown, permission normalization (755/644), trailing-slash semantics, delete mirroring, dry-run, and confirm. It also notes SSH requirement and that bytes never pass through the model. No contradictions.

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 paragraph that front-loads the main purpose and then efficiently covers all key behaviors (permissions, trailing-slash, delete, dry-run/confirm, SSH). No redundant or filler sentences.

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 the tool's complexity (6 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the main workflow end-to-end: resolving site info, SSH transfer, permissions, and execution modes. It lacks specific error handling or return value info, but is sufficient for an agent to use effectively.

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?

The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: explains trailing-slash semantics for local_path, clarifies dest_subpath is relative to web root, and details delete's destructive use with confirm. It supplements schema coverage (67%) with examples and usage guidance.

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 uploads local files/directories to a site's web root over SSH, specifying the mechanism (rsync/scp). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'site_file_put' by its bulk upload and permission normalization, but does not explicitly differentiate from 'site_files_deploy' or other siblings.

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 provides clear context for using the tool, including the SSH requirement, dry-run preview, and confirm execution. It explains when to use trailing slashes and the delete flag, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like single-file upload or other deploy methods.

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