Upload Local File

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

The description outlines the multi-step process (read file, get presigned URL, upload, create media entry) beyond the annotations. It adds context about the workflow, though it omits potential constraints like file size limits or permission requirements.

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 concise with two main sentences plus a follow-up list. It front-loads the core purpose and steps in a dense but clear manner, though it could be slightly more structured with bullet points.

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 multi-step upload tool, the description is complete: it covers the process, addresses local files, and directs to post-upload tools. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, making this description sufficient.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds little new meaning beyond the schema. It repeats some hints (e.g., 'Display name defaults to filename') but does not clarify parameter interactions or provide additional semantic context.

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 action: uploading a local file for transcription and analysis. It is specific about the resource (local file) and the goal (transcription/analysis), but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like upload_media or upload_and_analyze.

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 implies usage context (works with any audio/video file on local filesystem) and suggests follow-up tools, but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools for remote files.

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