swsd_upload_attachment

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotent behavior. Description adds context about transport constraints and the SWSD_WRITE_MODE setting, but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing attachments, file size limits, 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?

Description is two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by parameter guidance and behavioral note. No wasted words or redundant information.

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's complexity (5 parameters, 3 required, no output schema), the description covers purpose and transport constraints but is missing crucial details: return format, error conditions, idempotency implications (already in annotations), and prerequisites like parent record existence. 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?

Input schema covers all 5 parameters with 100% description coverage. The description adds value beyond schema by guiding which parameter to use (content_base64 for HTTP, file_path for stdio), and by noting the write mode. This extra context justifies a score above baseline 3.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Upload' and clearly specifies the resource as attachment to various SWSD parent types (incident, problem, change, etc.). It differentiates from sibling tools like swsd_add_incident_comment (comment vs attachment) and swsd_create_incident (creation vs attachment).

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 limited usage guidance: it tells when to use content_base64 vs file_path based on transport (hosted/HTTP vs stdio), and mentions WRITE mode. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, prerequisites (e.g., parent record must exist), or exclusions.

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