add_entity_attachment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write/safety profile is covered structurally. The word "temporary" hints that the temp file is consumed or promoted by this call, but the description never states what happens to tempFileId afterwards or that notify triggers notifications, leaving real behavioral gaps against a low annotation bar.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states action, prerequisite, and scope with zero filler. Nothing is wasted or buried.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and 4 parameters, the description covers the core action but omits what notify does, what happens to the temp file after attaching, and whether permissions on the target entity are required. Adequate but with clear 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 coverage is 50%: entityType and tempFileId are documented in the schema, and the description redundantly reinforces the temp-file source and entity types. The two undocumented parameters, entityId and especially notify, get no meaning from the description at all. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ("Attach a temporary file") and enumerates the exact entity scope (project, portfolio, goal), which separates it from the many other attachment siblings like upload_issue_attachment and list_entity_attachments. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with the closest siblings, so it is clear but not fully differentiating.

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?

It names the prerequisite source of the file ("from upload_temp_attachment"), which tells the agent this tool must be preceded by the upload step. There are no explicit when-not conditions or alternative routing, so it is clear context without exclusions.

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