executions_attachments_create

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

Discloses that it creates a record with uploaded=false, returns a presigned S3 URL (PUT, 300s), and requires a subsequent PATCH to confirm. This goes beyond the schema and no annotations are provided.

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?

Short and to the point, but mixes English and Portuguese, which could be confusing. The workflow is front-loaded in English, then detailed in Portuguese.

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?

Covers the full creation workflow including subsequent steps, but lacks details on error handling or limits. For a creation tool without output schema, this is fairly complete.

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 60% and description adds little beyond what's in the schema. It provides context (e.g., size in bytes, MIME type) but does not deeply enrich parameter meaning.

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?

Clearly states 'Create execution attachment' and specifies it returns a presigned upload URL, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete, list, update.

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?

Provides explicit workflow steps: create record, get presigned URL, upload, then confirm with PATCH. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives.

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