scobees_upload_bild

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the uploaded image becomes publicly available in the Serlo editor media store and that it returns a URL, but it does not mention authentication requirements, file-size limits, overwrite behavior, or error handling for a write operation with public visibility.

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 front-loaded sentences with no wasted text. The primary purpose and return value come first, followed by the critical storage/privacy note.

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?

For a single-parameter upload tool without an output schema, the description explains the result (a URL for Markdown), accepted formats, storage visibility, and a privacy constraint. It is mostly complete, though an agent would still lack auth and size-limit details.

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%, so the `file_path` parameter is already documented. The description adds useful meaning by listing accepted image formats (png/jpg/gif/webp/svg), which constrains what the local path may point to, though it does not clarify path absoluteness or file existence expectations.

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 a specific verb and resource: it uploads an image for an interactive worksheet and returns the URL for Markdown embedding. It lists supported formats and the intended use, but it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from the sibling `scobees_upload_material`.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool: uploading an image for an interactive worksheet and embedding the returned URL as Markdown. It adds a content exclusion ('keine Personenfotos oder vertraulichen Inhalte') but does not name or compare against alternatives such as `scobees_upload_material`.

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