There's a lot wrong with that.
POST has the semantics of sending data to a resource. What you're essentially saying here is that you're sending an image to the avatar resource. That's not what you're trying to do though. What you're actually trying to do is place a resource at that URI. For that, you use PUT, not POST.
Then we have the problem of conflicts. What if there's a resource there already? Now you need to introduce If-None-Match and things like that.
Then we have the problem that /users/{id}/avatar might be an inappropriate place to put that resource. Maybe the server needs to store it on a CDN or something.
Finally, we have the problem that this isn't a REST API you are describing, since the client and server implementations are coupled together. In a REST API, the API documentation doesn't instruct developers where to place resources, the server instructs clients where to place resources.
One way of handling avatar upload in a REST API would be for the User media type to define an action that sets the avatar image. The client would then follow that action to upload the image.
From an HTTP perspective, a likely implementation would be to POST to a URL that returns a 201 with the location of the newly-uploaded avatar. But the key thing is that the server defines how the client does that, you don't hard-code behaviour into all your clients.
If that's too abstract for you, think of it as . It's simple to implement – much easier than hard-coding a load of URI patterns in all your clients and hoping you'll never have to change them.
From a guidance standpoint – for an API, define the structure of common interactions (e.g. file upload), and have your media types include those structures when they need clients to be able to change state. Your API documentation should describe your media types and relationships, and never URI structures. If you predefine URI structures, it's not a REST API.