upload_image

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only specifies input format (Base64, MIME type, filename) but omits essential details: what happens after upload (e.g., returns ID/URL?), any side effects, size limits, or permission requirements.

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 concise sentences with no redundancy. The first states purpose, the second gives parameter format instructions. Every word adds value.

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?

Input format is well-covered, but output is missing entirely. Users don't know what the tool returns (URL, ID, success confirmation). Given no output schema, description should explain result. Lacks completeness for a mutation tool.

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 description carries full burden. It adds meaning beyond schema titles: explains image_base64 is Base64-encoded, provides MIME type example ('image/png'), and filename example ('cover.png'). Could further specify constraints like max file size.

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 an image') and its purpose ('to use in knowledge base articles'). No sibling tool performs uploading, so it is well-distinguished.

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 when to use the tool (when needing an image for articles) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. It lacks exclusions or context for comparing with other tools.

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