attach_linked_file

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full transparency burden. It states this is a write operation but does not disclose error conditions, prerequisites (file existence, permissions), or side effects.

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?

Single sentence is efficient and direct, but could be enhanced with brief parameter hints without becoming verbose. Still minimal fluff.

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 three parameters, 0% schema description, no annotations, and an output schema (unseen), the description is too sparse to prepare an agent for successful invocation. Missing details on return value, defaults, and required context.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description adds no meaning to the three parameters (item_key, file_path, title). It does not explain format, constraints, or implied values, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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 attaches a linked (non-uploaded) local file to an existing item, distinguishing it from upload-style file attachment. However, it does not define what 'local' means (client vs server) or how linking works.

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 implies use for non-uploaded files but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs 'attach_file' or other alternatives. No when-not-to-use or scenario examples are provided.

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