Prepare attachment upload

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains the protocol (returns URL and headers, requires client-side PUT) and includes the 'issue' field for finalization. Lacks details on auth, rate limits, or error handling, but adequately describes the two-step process.

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?

Extremely concise with two sentences. Front-loaded with the main purpose and structured to describe input->output->next step. No unnecessary 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?

No output schema, but description lists return fields ({assetUrl, uploadUrl, headers, issue}) and explains the client's next action. Lacks details like size limits or error handling, but sufficient for a presigned URL tool.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining that the 'issue' parameter is used in the finalize step and that the tool returns a presigned URL, providing context beyond the schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the tool gets a presigned URL for upload, with a specific verb 'Get', and outlines the subsequent steps (PUT then call create_attachment_from_upload). Differentiates from sibling tools like create_attachment and create_attachment_from_upload by describing the workflow.

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?

Provides step-by-step instructions on how to use the tool: get URL, upload bytes, then call create_attachment_from_upload. Implicitly tells when to use (when needing to upload a file) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives.

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