upload_attachment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the upload and return of an ID but lacks disclosure of important behavioral traits such as file size limits, authentication requirements, or processing time. This is insufficient for safe and effective use.

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 extremely concise with three sentences and a clear argument list. Every sentence adds value, and the structure front-loads the purpose and return value.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and parameters, but given no annotations and an output schema (not shown), it lacks behavioral context like file size limits or security. It is adequate but not fully comprehensive for a file upload tool.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description adds significant meaning by explaining each parameter: content as base64-encoded, filename with an example, and mime_type with MIME type examples. This goes beyond schema field names.

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 verb 'Upload' and the resource 'a file for use when sending emails.' It also explains the return value (attachment_id) and its purpose for send_email, distinguishing it from sibling tools like send_email and get_attachment_url.

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 description implicitly indicates when to use: before sending an email to obtain an attachment_id. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is clear given the sibling tools and the email workflow.

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