upload_voucher_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the file replaces an existing attachment, file size limits, supported formats beyond image/PDF, authentication needs, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it omits essential information. It does not use the limited space efficiently to cover key aspects like usage or behavior.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, error conditions, or confirmation of upload. Given the moderate complexity, more detail is needed to fully specify the tool's behavior.

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 75% (3 of 4 parameters described). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The 'creditDebit' parameter is not described in the schema, and the description does not explain it. Baseline is 3 due to high coverage, but the missing description for creditDebit prevents a higher score.

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 verb 'Upload' and the resource 'file (receipt image/PDF) for a voucher'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which are upload tools.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool, prerequisites (e.g., voucher must exist), or alternatives. Since there are no sibling upload tools, the need for exclusions is reduced, but the lack of usage context still hampers selection.

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