postgrid_get_upload_url

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly discloses that the tool returns two URLs, explains their distinct purposes, and outlines the full upload workflow. It does not mention URL expiration or size limits, but for a zero-parameter presigned-URL tool the disclosed behavior is substantive and useful.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then gives a concise numbered workflow, and closes with the environment recommendation. Every sentence adds distinct value without redundancy.

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?

Even without an output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns, how to use those return values, and the typical integration point with postgrid_create_letter. For a zero-parameter tool, this is complete enough 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description mentions no parameters because there are none to explain, and it adds workflow context that makes calling the tool unambiguous.

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 names a specific action ('get a presigned URL'), the resource ('upload a PDF directly to cloud storage'), and the exact role of the returned URLs (PUT for upload, GET for postgrid_create_letter). It clearly differentiates this from siblings by describing a cloud-storage-based upload flow rather than a direct file upload.

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 gives an explicit three-step workflow: call this tool, upload to the PUT URL via curl, then pass the GET URL to postgrid_create_letter. It also states the recommended environment ('Cowork or sandboxed environments where file system access is unavailable'), which tells an agent when to choose this over direct-upload alternatives.

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