upload_drawing

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals key behaviors: multi-page PDFs are split per sheet, and AI extraction can be skipped via do_not_extract=True. No mention of destructive behavior or auth needs, but the behavior is well-covered for a file upload 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?

Two sentences, zero waste. Front-loaded with the core action, followed by critical behavioral details. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool has 2 parameters, an output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers the key behaviors: multi-page splitting and extraction skip. It's complete enough for an AI to invoke correctly.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It clarifies file_path (implied as the source) and the do_not_extract parameter (controls server-side extraction). This adds meaning beyond the bare 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 'Upload an isometric drawing (PDF) to the current project', specifying the verb (upload), resource (isometric drawing), format (PDF), and target (current project). It distinguishes from siblings like upload_document (generic) and upload_large_format_drawing (large format).

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 provides context for when to use the tool (uploading isometric PDFs) and explains the do_not_extract flag's purpose. It implicitly advises when to set the flag but doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or compare with other upload tools.

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