Upload a local file

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds the crucial fact that media cannot be deleted through any API once uploaded, and it reiterates the confirm:true requirement. This goes beyond the annotations to explain why the action is destructive and irreversible.

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 short sentences deliver the core purpose and the most important behavioral warning. The critical constraint about irreversibility is front-loaded in the second sentence, and every word contributes useful information with no padding or repetition of schema details.

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?

The combination of the description, detailed parameter schema, and annotations covers what an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly: the local path requirement, the optional album, the confirmation flag, and the irreversible nature of the action. It does not explain return values, but for an upload tool with no output schema, the absence is not a serious gap.

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%, and each parameter already has a meaningful description, including the confirmation requirement and account selection. The description adds little beyond clarifying that uploads are photos/videos from a local path, so it appropriately stays at the baseline rather than adding significant value.

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 first sentence names a specific verb (Upload), a concrete resource (photo or video), and a distinguishing source (a path on the machine running this server). This clearly separates the tool from URL-based uploads and other library operations, so an agent can identify the right tool without opening schemas.

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 clear context: use this tool for local file uploads, optionally into an album. It does not explicitly name alternatives like upload_from_url, but the local-path framing and sibling list make the intended use obvious. It provides no explicit exclusions, which keeps this just below a 5.

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