kaggle_submit_to_competition

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

Adds behavioral details beyond annotations: explains daily slot consumption, irreversibility, and return values (status + remaining budget). Aligns with destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. Critical info (gating, budget, irreversibility, return) is front-loaded and efficiently communicated.

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?

Provides sufficient context for a submission tool: gating, budget limit, consumption, and return values. Slight gap in parameter details, but overall complete given complexity and sibling 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 has 0% coverage; description does not describe individual parameters (e.g., file_path, message) beyond mentioning confirm_token. Lacks detail to help the agent understand parameter roles.

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's purpose: 'Submit a predictions file.' It specifies that it is gated, requires a confirm_token, consumes a daily slot, and returns status, leaving no ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly states prerequisites: 'requires a valid confirm_token from kaggle_preview_submission AND available submission budget (~5/day/team).' Warns it's 'hard to undo,' guiding against misuse. Effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like kaggle_preview_submission.

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