Upload store listing image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses file formats (PNG/JPEG) and that it uploads one image, but omits auth requirements, whether it overwrites an existing slot image, and edit-state prerequisites. For a mutation tool, this leaves key behavioral traits undisclosed.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler; every word contributes. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simple upload action, though the brevity trades off completeness, which is addressed under contextual completeness.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema; the description does not explain the edit lifecycle (create, upload, commit) or whether the uploaded image replaces or appends to a slot. Although the schema documents parameters, the description leaves important workflow context missing 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 the schema already documents all five parameters, including editId, imageType enum values, and filePath. The description adds only a PNG/JPEG file-type constraint and 'for a language', which is a minor semantic addition; baseline 3 is 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 has a specific verb 'Uploads' and resource 'image' with scope 'store listing image slot for a language', so an agent can distinguish it from play_upload_apk/bundle and play_list_images. It does not explicitly name any sibling alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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 when/when-not guidance, no prerequisites such as requiring an editId from play_create_edit or committing the edit afterward, and no alternatives named. The only implied context is the slot, which is not enough to route clearly between this and play_update_listing or play_delete_image.

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