upload_to_sandbox

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral details beyond the basic action. It does not mention whether existing files are overwritten, size limits, or any side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, and this gap is significant for a mutation tool.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences with no redundant words. Every part adds value: the action, the destination, and the use case. This is exemplary conciseness.

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 simplicity (two parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core purpose and use case. It lacks details about return values or overwrite behavior, but those are likely minor for an upload operation. The description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters, including that 'filename' will be placed at '/tmp/<filename>' and 'content_base64' is base64-encoded content. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so it earns 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 clearly states the action ('Upload a file'), the target destination ('sandbox container's /tmp directory'), and the intended purpose ('dropping binaries or samples for Python analysis'). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like download_from_sandbox or list_sandbox_files.

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 phrase 'Useful for dropping binaries or samples for Python analysis' provides clear context for when the tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when to use upload vs. base64_decode or python_eval).

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