Iniciar impressão de arquivo no SD

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses default values (plate=1, bed_leveling=true, use_ams=true, timelapse=false) and the fact it reads from SD, but it does not explain whether the call blocks until print completion, how errors are surfaced, or authentication requirements beyond parameters. This is a moderate disclosure but leaves room for important behavioral gaps.

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 two sentences with zero waste. The primary purpose is stated first, followed by the relevant workflow. It is perfectly sized and front-loaded.

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 8 parameters, full schema descriptions, but no output schema, the description covers the essential workflow (upload → list → print) and defaults. It lacks details on asynchronous behavior and error handling, but for a start-print command, the provided context is largely sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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%, so each parameter is already documented in the schema. The description adds only minor context (e.g., file path relative to SD root is in the schema too). The defaults mentioned in the description mirror schema defaults, so it does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 it starts printing a .gcode.3mf file already on the SD card, using a specific verb (Inicia) and resource (impressão de arquivo). It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly referencing the upload and list workflow, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It provides clear workflow guidance: use bambu_upload_file first if needed and bambu_list_files to check the SD contents. It also states defaults for plate and bed leveling, giving context on typical invocation. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives like bambu_send_gcode, though the implied flow is strong.

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