import_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states what the tool does and which file types it supports, but does not explain what happens during the import (e.g., processing, indexing), whether existing documents are updated or duplicated, or how errors and results are returned. For a tool that mutates a knowledge base, this is a significant gap.

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, direct sentence focused on the essential facts: action, target resource, and supported file formats. No unnecessary words or filler. The main idea is front-loaded.

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?

The schema documents all three parameters, and the description clarifies the tool's scope and file-type restrictions. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the agent is left without information about the import result, failure behavior, or side effects. It is adequate for a simple import tool but not fully complete.

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%, which gives the baseline 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by listing supported file extensions, which clarifies what file_path values are valid and helps the agent choose appropriate inputs.

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 ('Import'), the resource ('a local file into OpenMemory RAG knowledge base'), and supported formats (PDF, DOCX, TXT, MD, HTML). The phrase 'local file' distinguishes it from sibling tools import_url and import_text.

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 makes the usage context clear: this tool is for local file imports, not URL or text imports. It does not explicitly state exclusions or name alternatives, but the sibling tool names and the phrase 'local file' provide enough directional guidance.

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