chat_sendSends a message to the room of a channel by HTTP. The speaker is the guest (X-Guest-Token), the same one that the WebSocket recognizes; without a guest, the account session.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | The message text, within `max_length`. | |
| author | No | Nickname to use; without it, the server makes a stable one. | |
| channel_id | Yes | Channel ID in the catalog, for example `GloboNews.br`. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / author / descriptionPrevious value: -"Apelido a usar; sem ele o servidor gera um estável."New value: +"Nickname to use; without it, the server makes a stable one."Input schema / properties / body / descriptionPrevious value: -"O texto da mensagem, dentro de `max_length`."New value: +"The message text, within `max_length`."Input schema / properties / channel_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"ID do canal no catálogo."New value: +"Channel ID in the catalog, for example `GloboNews.br`."Input schema / properties / channel_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"ID do canal no iptv-org."New value: +"ID do canal no catálogo."Input schema / properties / author / descriptionAdded value: +"Apelido a usar; sem ele o servidor gera um estável."Input schema / properties / body / descriptionAdded value: +"O texto da mensagem, dentro de `max_length`."Input schema / properties / channel_id / descriptionAdded value: +"ID do canal no iptv-org."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: transport ('by HTTP') and the speaker-resolution rule (guest via X-Guest-Token, otherwise the account session), which an agent needs to predict whose name appears on the message.
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 tight sentences with the action front-loaded and no filler. The identity clause is slightly dense but every clause carries information.
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?
With no output schema, the description leaves the return value (message id, echo of author, error on exceeding max_length) unspecified, and it never mentions rate limits or duplicate-message risk. Auth/identity, the main ambiguity for this tool, is covered, so it is adequate rather than complete.
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 100% with three fully documented parameters, so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail (e.g. the max_length referenced by the body param) beyond what is already structured.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Sends a message to the room of a channel'), which is clearly distinct from comment-oriented siblings like post_comment and the read-side chat_history. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so it lands just below the top band.
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?
There is no statement of when to use this over post_comment, chat_history, or any other messaging path, and no preconditions or exclusions. The identity note explains who the speaker is, not when the tool should be selected.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.