Upload a local image

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write semantics are covered. The description's only added behavioral detail is that the path resolves on the server host, not the client; it says nothing about the 20 MB cap, storage location, or whether a repeated upload duplicates the image.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action, with the parenthetical caveat placed exactly where it is needed. No padding, though it is arguably too terse for a mutating upload tool.

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?

An output schema exists and all four parameters are documented in the schema, so return values and argument details are not the description's burden. The remaining gap is routing guidance against upload_image_from_url, which an agent would have to infer.

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 100% – path, name, category and description each carry their own schema-level explanation including the 20 MB limit. The description restates the path constraint but adds no syntax or format meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Upload a local image file ... to Image Label') and the parenthetical clarifies the source is a filesystem path, which implicitly separates it from upload_image_from_url. Sibling differentiation is only implied by 'local' rather than stated explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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 'path on the machine running this server' note tells the agent where the file must live, which rules out remote files, but it never names upload_image_from_url as the alternative for URL-based uploads or states any other when-to-use condition.

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