upload_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions returning a URL but does not disclose permissions, file size limits, overwrite behavior, or any other side effects. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 two sentences plus a one-parameter Args block. The first sentence front-loads the purpose and output, and the Args section adds necessary parameter context. No wasted words.

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 simple one-parameter upload tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose, parameter semantics, and the resulting URL. It lacks usage guidance and behavioral caveats, but the tool's simplicity keeps it reasonably 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?

The input schema only defines file_path as a string with no description. The description's Args section adds 'Absolute path to the file on your computer', which provides essential meaning beyond the schema. This compensates well for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 states 'Upload a file from your computer to Ed Discussion and get a URL' — this gives a specific verb, resource, and output. It also distinguishes itself from sibling upload_file_url by specifying the source as the user's computer.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like upload_file_url or download_file. The phrase 'from your computer' implies the local-file use case, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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