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

Annotations are minimal (no readOnly, no destructive). The description adds that the message is 'signed' and that permission checks are required, but does not disclose further behavioral traits such as idempotency, rate limits, or what happens upon success or failure. It meets the minimum acceptable level.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a compact, instruction-rich second sentence. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy or fluff.

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 complexity (10 parameters, 4 required, no output schema), the description only covers permission checks and a brief purpose. It fails to explain parameters, return values, or error handling, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does not describe any of the 10 parameters (e.g., chatId, message, intentType) beyond the implicit 'send a signed message' purpose. This leaves the agent without semantic context for parameter values.

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 verb 'Send' and the resource 'AI Cofounder chat', with the specific qualifier 'signed message'. This accurately distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_ai_cofounder_chats or create_ai_cofounder_chat.

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 provides explicit instructions: check business permissions, call check_business_tool_access, handle grace-period warnings, and never proceed when blocked. It also clarifies that FREE businesses cannot use this tool, giving clear when-not-to-use guidance.

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