upload_media

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states the input is a local file and the output is a hosted URL, but lacks details on auth requirements, rate limits, file size restrictions, or whether uploads are destructive.

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?

Single sentence of 16 words, front-loaded with the action, no filler. Perfect conciseness.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the basics. However, it omits details like supported file formats, max file size, and whether the file must exist locally, which an agent would need to avoid errors.

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% with a single parameter well-described. The description adds the context that the path is for local image/video and the output is for scheduling, consistent with the schema. No significant extra meaning beyond 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 image/video file and returns a hosted URL for use in media_urls. It specifies the resource and action, distinguishing from sibling tools focused on posting and scheduling.

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 implies using the tool before scheduling by mentioning the hosted URL for media_urls. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for handling media.

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