uploadVersion

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses auto-increment of versionNumber and required credentials, but fails to mention side effects, error behavior, or security nuances. The inconsistency about projectId further reduces transparency.

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?

Three sentences, each adding value: purpose, details, usage context. No unnecessary words. Well-structured and efficient.

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 no output schema and simple parameters, description covers purpose and one behavioral detail. Missing return value description, error handling, and confirmation that projectId is required but not a parameter. Partially complete but with gaps.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds no new parameter information beyond stating the purpose. Baseline of 3 is appropriate; no enhancement but no detraction.

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?

Description clearly states 'Upload a new HTML version to an existing DesignPin module' with specific verb and resource. Auto-increment detail adds precision. Siblings are different tools, so no confusion.

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?

Description mentions 'Requires API key + projectId + moduleId' but projectId is not in input schema, which is inconsistent. It describes when to use ('push design iterations') but does not specify when not to use or compare with siblings. Adequate but with a notable gap.

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