replace_qrcode_file

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

The description discloses the core behavior (replacement without changing QR/link), but with no annotations, it omits details like side effects, authorization needs, or validation. The agent is left to infer safety and consequences.

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 sentence, which is concise but under-specified for a tool with 5 parameters. It sacrifices clarity for brevity, lacking needed detail.

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?

With 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description fails to equip the agent with enough information to use the tool properly. It doesn't explain parameter usage, return values, or prerequisites, despite having an output schema.

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 0%, and the description adds no information about parameters. The five parameters (id, file_path, file_url, file_base64, filename) are entirely unexplained, leaving the agent without guidance on how to provide file input.

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 replaces the file of a file-backed QR code while preserving the QR code and link, distinguishing it from related tools like update_qrcode and create_file_qrcode.

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, nor any prerequisites or restrictions mentioned. The implicit usage is updating an existing QR code's file, but no exclusions or context are provided.

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