Upload a receipt file to sevDesk

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

With no annotations, the description discloses it's a WRITE operation that changes data in sevDesk and mentions 'temporary voucher storage', giving sufficient behavioral context without contradicting any 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 two concise sentences plus a warning, front-loaded with the primary action and essential usage note, with 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 tool with no output schema, the description explains the return value (filename token) and its purpose, the file type, and storage duration (temporary), covering key aspects adequately.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds marginal value by explaining the return token's role, but does not provide additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 uploads a local PDF/image to sevDesk's temporary voucher storage and returns a filename token for use with sevdesk_create_voucher, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_voucher and list operations.

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 implicitly tells when to use (before creating a voucher) and explicitly warns it's a write operation refused under SEVDESK_READ_ONLY, providing clear context but not alternative tools for different scenarios.

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