operations_uploadfile

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the async parameter but does not detail overwrite behavior, required permissions, or what happens on failure. This is insufficient 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, efficient sentence that immediately states the tool's core function. No extraneous words; front-loaded with the key action.

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 4 parameters (0 required), the description omits important context: How is the file content transmitted? What does a successful upload return? What is the effect of _async? The description feels incomplete for a complex upload operation.

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%, so the description adds minimal new meaning. The mention of 'writes to specified remote path' loosely connects to 'fs' and 'remote' parameters, but does not clarify their interaction or add syntax details 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 clearly identifies the tool as uploading files via multipart/form-data and specifies the destination (remote path). It distinguishes from sibling tools like operations_copyfile (copy existing file) and operations_movefile (move existing file) by focusing on uploading new content.

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?

While the purpose is clear, the description lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., operations_copyurl for downloading from URL). No 'when not to use' or contextual hints are provided.

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