upload_media

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the upload action but does not mention side effects, required authentication, supported file types, destination behavior, or whether it replaces existing media. This is minimal for a mutation tool.

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 a single efficient sentence with no filler. However, it is so brief that it under-delivers on context that other dimensions measure. As pure conciseness it is good, though not exemplary because it omits important guidance.

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 no annotations, no output schema, four undocumented parameters, and sibling tools that could overlap, this description is incomplete. An agent would struggle to know how to set post_id or filename, what the upload returns, or how this relates to set_featured_image.

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 0%, and the description does not clarify any of the four parameters. 'path', 'post_id', 'alt_text', and 'filename' remain entirely unexplained, and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema's bare field names.

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 action ('Upload') and the resource ('a local asset to WordPress media library'). It is specific and distinguishes the operation from reads or post-related mutations, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like set_featured_image.

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 usage when uploading local media, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_featured_image, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. An agent gets no routing help beyond the basic action.

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