Upload a receipt file to sevDesk

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is mostly covered. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: it is a WRITE operation, is refused under SEVDESK_READ_ONLY, targets temporary voucher storage, and returns a token for sevdesk_create_voucher.

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 definition is front-loaded with the purpose and workflow in the first sentence, followed by the write-operation warning. It is brief, structured, and every sentence contributes useful selection or safety information.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description explains the key return value: a filename token to pass to sevdesk_create_voucher. With the schema fully documenting the three parameters and annotations covering safety hints, the description is complete enough for correct invocation.

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 filePath, mimeType, and dryRun are already documented in the schema. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 local PDF/image/XML e-invoice to sevDesk temporary voucher storage. It also names the downstream sibling, sevdesk_create_voucher, so the agent can distinguish this preparatory upload step from voucher creation itself.

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?

Usage is clearly implied: call this to upload a local file and obtain a filename token, then pass that token to sevdesk_create_voucher. It also notes the SEVDESK_READ_ONLY refusal condition, but it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternative upload paths.

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