Create or resume an Assembly

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions creating/resuming and waiting, but omits critical details: authentication requirements, error behavior, side effects, or what happens on resume. This leaves the agent guessing.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks any structure (e.g., no sections, no parameter guidance). It is neither verbose nor well-organized, but brevity alone does not make it valuable.

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 tool's complexity (10 parameters, nested objects, output schema), the description is extremely sparse. It does not explain the output, error handling, or what 'resume' entails. This is inadequate for an agent to use effectively.

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 0%, yet the description explains none of the 10 parameters. The only hint is 'optionally uploading files' loosely relating to the 'files' parameter. This is entirely insufficient for effective invocation.

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 action ('create or resume') and resource ('Assembly'). It also mentions optional file uploading and waiting, which gives a good overview. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'transloadit_get_assembly_status' or 'transloadit_lint_assembly_instructions'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks explicit context like prerequisites, scenarios, or when not to use it. The mention of 'optionally uploading files' is a hint but insufficient.

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