Get upload

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and side-effect expectations. The description adds that it returns 'metadata' rather than content, which clarifies return type but lacks detail on what metadata fields to expect. Since the description carries a lighter burden due to strong annotations, a 3 is appropriate.

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 a single, short sentence that is entirely on-topic. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, and contains no filler or redundant phrasing. Perfectly concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 simple get-by-id tool with one parameter and strong annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. It clearly indicates the operation returns metadata, distinguishing it from content retrieval. While it does not enumerate possible metadata fields, that level of detail is not necessary given the tool's simplicity and the schema's explicit parameter documentation.

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 schema describes uploadId as 'Path parameter uploadId' with 100% coverage, so the parameter is fully documented. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'one uploaded file', which aligns with the parameter. With high schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is justified.

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 states a specific verb ('fetches'), a resource ('metadata for one uploaded file'), and the singular nature distinguishes it from list operations. It does not explicitly name sibling tools, but the name 'get_upload' and the contrast with 'list_uploads' and 'download_upload' make the purpose clear. It is not tautological and adds resource specificity.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_uploads or download_upload. However, the need for an uploadId in the schema and the phrase 'one uploaded file' imply it is for fetching metadata of a specific upload. No exclusions or alternative routes are given, so an agent must infer usage from context.

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