Get Basecamp Upload

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

Annotations already declare safe read-only behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it describes what is returned for different file types (content vs metadata), which goes beyond annotations. It could mention potential size limits or error cases, but the provided details are substantial.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the simple single-parameter input and no output schema, the description fully covers the tool's behavior by explaining per-file-type return handling. It provides sufficient context for an agent to understand what to expect.

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 only parameter, 'upload_id', has a clear schema description. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('upload'), and differentiates behavior by file type (images, text, binary). This clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'basecamp_list_uploads' and 'basecamp_download_blob'.

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 (e.g., to retrieve content of images/text files), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'basecamp_download_blob' for raw byte access or 'basecamp_list_uploads' for metadata listing.

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