files_upload_v2

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It discloses the multi-step flow and that it does not read from the host filesystem, but lacks details on authentication requirements, size limits, rate limits, or potential side effects.

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?

Two sentences with clear front-loading of the main action. Every sentence adds value, though the second sentence could be more impactful if placed first.

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?

Given the complexity (7 parameters, output schema exists), the description lacks context on when to choose this over siblings, prerequisites (e.g., authentication scope), and behavior details like file size limits. Output schema partially compensates, but overall incomplete.

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%, and the description adds minimal value beyond the schema. The description's note about taking file contents directly aligns with the 'content' parameter but doesn't provide new context for other parameters.

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 file content and runs Slack's recommended upload flow. It distinguishes from reading from the filesystem, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like files_upload (v1) beyond the version number.

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?

Provides implicit guidance by stating it takes file contents directly, implying use when content is a string. However, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to siblings like files_upload or files_get_upload_url_external.

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