Upload Document (Multipart)

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

Annotations provide basic info (not readOnly, not destructive, openWorld), but the description adds no additional behavioral context. Critical aspects like file size limits, overwrite behavior, or response format are absent.

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 concise sentence, front-loading the key action. It could be slightly expanded with essential details without becoming verbose.

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?

Despite annotations and high schema coverage, the description omits critical information about the multipart upload (e.g., what file parameter is expected, how to provide it). The absence of a file parameter in the schema makes the description misleading.

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 basic descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, such as constraints on title/author or the multipart specifics for file upload.

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'), the resource ('document to a collection'), and the method ('multipart form data'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like transkribus_coll_upload_doc by specifying the upload mechanism.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., transkribus_coll_upload_doc, transkribus_coll_create_doc_from_pdf). It does not specify prerequisites, file types, or context.

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