Finalize an upload session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the core verification and move behavior, but it omits side effects such as invalidating the handle, deleting the staged file, or what happens on size/hash mismatch.

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 one compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the verification behavior and states the final move action efficiently.

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?

For a single-parameter finalization tool, the description covers the main action, but it lacks explicit sequencing context and parameter meaning. Without annotations or an output schema, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 only parameter, 'handle', is not explained anywhere in the description. The agent must infer that handle identifies the upload session to finalize. The description should compensate for the empty schema but does not.

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 states a specific action sequence: verify size and sha256, then move the staged file to its destination. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like file_transfer_write and file_transfer_status.

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 term 'staged file' and title 'Finalize an upload session' imply this is the terminal step after writing, but the description never explicitly says to use it after file_transfer_write or provides when-not-to-use guidance. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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