miro_upload_document

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

Annotations only provide a title, so the description bears responsibility. It discloses file size limit (6 MB), supported formats, requirement for local file, and notes about remote documents. While it could mention what happens on failure or permissions, it reasonably transparent.

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 well-structured with clear sections: main sentence, USE WHEN, PARAMETERS, NOTE, RELATED, VOICE-FRIENDLY. It is informative without being verbose, every section adds value.

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 tool's complexity and presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameter details, usage context, file constraints, alternatives, and expected feedback. It is complete for an AI agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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%, but the description adds value by specifying valid file formats and size limit for file_path, noting x/y as position, and parent_id as frame. This enriches understanding beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states the action ('Upload a local document file to a Miro board'), clearly indicating the verb, resource, and scope. It differentiates from siblings like miro_upload_image (for images) and miro_create_document (for remote URLs).

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 includes a 'USE WHEN' section listing user phrases such as 'upload this document', and explicitly tells when to use alternatives (miro_upload_image for images, miro_create_document for remote URLs). This provides clear guidance on tool selection.

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