upload_article_header_image

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, and it mostly does not. It says 'Upload' (a mutation) but never states whether an existing header image is replaced, whether the upload is synchronous, or what permissions/state are required. The only behavioral hint is the list of accepted source formats.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, with no filler. Every clause (context, supported source types) contributes information.

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 one-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the what and the accepted input forms, but omits replace/overwrite behavior, required editor state, and timing relative to publish_article. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 single parameter's schema text ('Header image source (URL/local path/data URL)') is nearly identical to the description's phrasing, so no additional meaning is added. Baseline 3 applies when the schema fully documents the 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 (upload) and resource (header image) plus the operating context (current article editor), which cleanly separates it from siblings like fill_article_title, fill_article_body, and publish_article. An agent can identify what it does and where it applies without opening the schema.

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 phrase 'in the current article editor' implicitly signals the prerequisite state (an editor must already be open, e.g. via open_article_editor), which is useful. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no ordering relative to publish_article, and no named alternative.

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