browser_file_upload

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, but the description adds no additional behavioral context such as file chooser behavior, side effects, or failure modes. It merely restates the action without revealing what happens beyond the upload.

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 short sentence that immediately states the core function with no filler. It is appropriately minimal for a simple tool.

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 no output schema and mutating/destructive behavior, the description provides minimal context. It doesn't mention that this operates on the active browser page, potential side effects, or error conditions. The schema and annotations cover some basics, but the description is insufficient for an agent to use confidently.

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 coverage is 100% – the paths parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the 'if omitted' cancellation behavior. The description itself adds no parameter information, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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's action ('Upload') and indicates it can handle one or multiple files, differentiating it from siblings like browser_drop. However, it's minimalist and doesn't explicitly state the destination or context beyond the tool name.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_drop, nor are there any prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The description simply states the action without operational context.

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