tokportal_upload_video_direct

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds that it uploads multipart/form-data and returns a public URL, which is useful. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., storage costs, overwriting behavior) or authentication requirements beyond what annotations imply.

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 primary action. It avoids redundancy with the schema, though it could be slightly more structured with explicit parameter references.

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 upload tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but not rich. It does not mention file size limits, supported formats, or error handling, which could be important for an upload operation. The lack of output schema means the description should clarify the return value, which it does (public video URL).

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only clarifying the multipart form field names (bundle_id, file) and the optional idempotency header. 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?

The description clearly states the tool uploads a video file directly via multipart/form-data and returns a public URL. It distinguishes from sibling tools like tokportal_upload_video (likely a non-direct variant) and tokportal_upload_image_direct by specifying 'video' and 'direct'.

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 for direct video uploads but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over tokportal_upload_video or other upload methods. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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