fusion_import_bulk_data

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by stating that the operation loads real data, cannot be recalled, uploads to UCM, and queues jobs in order. It also discloses a subtle failure mode where a wrong account uploads successfully but becomes invisible to the import job with no error.

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 detailed but every sentence adds operational value, and the most critical warning (loads real data, cannot be recalled) is front-loaded. The parameter explanations are structured and directly map to the schema properties without redundancy.

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?

For a destructive bulk-import tool with no schema-level parameter descriptions, this covers all necessary context: the data flow, the job format, ordering, confirmation requirement, and the key failure mode. Having an output schema makes the lack of return-value detail acceptable.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the full burden, and it does: file_path is the local path, account is the UCM account with an example, jobs are described as ordered entries with a concrete structure, notification_code is the two-digit code, and confirmed is gated on user confirmation.

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 opens with a specific action: load a data file into Fusion (FBDI) and queue import jobs. It clearly distinguishes itself from related tools like fusion_submit_job by explaining the comma-joining behavior and bulk-import focus.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus fusion_submit_job, including the exact condition (parameters containing commas) that should route the agent to the alternative. Also instructs that `confirmed` must only be set after explicit user confirmation, and warns about the quiet account mismatch failure.

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