zoho_upload_attachment

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (write operation, non-destructive, open-world), and the description adds valuable return structure `{ storeName, attachmentPath, attachmentName }` that would otherwise be unavailable since there is no output schema. It also explains the conditional inline URL behavior when isInline is true.

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 concise sentences that front-load the core purpose and immediately explain the return contract and usage in sibling tools. Every sentence earns its place with 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?

With no output schema, the description supplies the essential return shape and integration guidance with send/draft/reply tools. Together with annotations and full schema coverage, an agent has enough information to invoke it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning for isInline beyond the schema's 'Upload as an inline image' by explaining it returns a URL usable as an <img src> in HTML content.

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?

States a specific verb (upload) and resource (local file to Zoho for email attachment), and explicitly names the sibling tools that consume the result. An agent can easily distinguish it from download_attachment or get_attachment_info.

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?

Clearly states the use case—attaching a local file to an email—and directs the agent to pass the returned fields into `attachments` of zoho_send_email, zoho_save_draft, or zoho_reply_to_email. No explicit when-not guidance, but the context is unambiguous.

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