upload_media

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It explicitly discloses side effects (adds a media record, consumes storage space) and a known behavioral limitation (JSON body may be rejected; may need multipart). This is more transparent than typical descriptions and goes beyond what annotations would convey.

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 well-structured with sections for purpose, API call, return structure, and side effects. Every section is informative and earns its place. It's concise without being underspecified.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the return structure, API endpoint, side effects, and a caveat about the JSON/multipart issue. This is complete for a simple upload tool, covering all essential aspects for an agent to invoke and interpret results correctly.

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 already provides a detailed description of media_data with an example, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add significant parameter-specific meaning beyond noting the media ID in the return structure. This matches the baseline score of 3.

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 (upload) and resource (media files to Shopline media library), and clarifies the outcome (obtain media ID for product images). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on the media library, whereas tools like add_product_images likely attach images directly to products.

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 clear context: use this to upload media and receive an ID for later use in product images. It also notes the JSON body limitation and advises fallback to multipart on format errors. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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