upload-attachment

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

Annotations already declare the operation is not read-only, not destructive, and open-world. The description adds useful behavior context: the file must exist at the given path, the server imposes a size limit, and the call returns a file ID. It does not cover overwrite behavior or permission requirements, but it adds meaningful detail beyond 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 well-structured with a clear opening sentence, bulleted required parameters, an example, a return note, and a caveat. It is slightly repetitive with the schema but remains efficient and front-loaded.

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 three-parameter upload tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers purpose, parameter examples, return value, and key preconditions. Edge cases such as overwrite behavior or error handling are omitted, but the core information an agent needs is present.

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%, so the schema already defines all three parameters. The description repeats those definitions and supplies an example with an absolute path, but it adds little semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Upload a file attachment to a Dooray task.' The word 'task' distinguishes it from sibling upload tools for drives and wiki pages, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 explains what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives such as upload-drive-file, upload-wiki-file, or download-attachment. No prerequisites or exclusion conditions are stated.

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