haops_upload_doc_image

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions accepting base64 image data and returning a URL, but does not specify permissions, rate limits, side effects (e.g., whether it replaces existing images), or error conditions. The description is minimal.

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?

Two sentences front-loading the purpose and key details. No wasted words.

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 file upload tool with no output schema, the description explains the return value (attachment record with URL). It covers the main workflow, though it could mention that the image is stored and associated with the section. Overall sufficient for a simple upload.

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 100% with clear descriptions for all 7 parameters. The description adds context about base64 encoding and the return value but does not provide parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states the verb ('upload'), the resource ('image to a documentation section'), and the expected return ('attachment record with a URL for embedding'). This distinguishes it from sibling 'haops_upload_help_image' which targets help articles.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings like 'haops_upload_help_image'. The description implies documentation sections but does not state when not to use or provide alternatives.

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