ingest_knowledge_base

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'ingest a file' without explaining what ingestion entails (e.g., overwriting, appending, async processing, error behavior). The 'params' object is left undocumented.

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, concise sentence that packs the core function and required inputs with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the action and essential 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?

Given the complexity (4 parameters, nested object, no output schema), the description lacks many important aspects: supported file types, size limits, response behavior, success/failure indicators, async nature. It covers only the bare minimum.

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 100% with brief descriptions. The description reiterates the key inputs but adds no additional constraints, formats, or example values. For a 4-parameter tool with a nested object, more detail on 'params' would be helpful.

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 action ('Ingest a file into an existing knowledge base') and lists required inputs (base64 content, filename, optional params). However, it does not differentiate from sibling ingest tools like ingest_knowledge_base_folder or ingest_knowledge_base_connector.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., folder or connector ingest). Lacks when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisites beyond the required parameters.

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