feegow_upload_patient_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It correctly identifies the tool as altering data (write) and requiring a config flag, but does not disclose size limits, error conditions, or success responses.

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 sentence with relevant context (tag, write indication, HTTP method). It is concise without fluff, though it could be structured with clearer sections.

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 nested objects (body with three required properties) and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, common errors, or file size limits, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 100% for all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 tool uploads a base64 file to the patient's medical record, using a specific verb ('upload') and resource ('patient file'). Among siblings, no other upload tool exists, making it distinct.

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 notes it's a write operation that requires the FEEGOW_ALLOW_WRITES=true flag, implying when to use it. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions or alternatives, though no sibling upload tool exists.

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