send_location

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it provides none. It does not mention any side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or whether an active chat is needed. 'Send a Location' is entirely opaque about runtime behavior.

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 only three words, which is concise but under-specified. It lacks necessary context, so the brevity does not aid understanding; it is an under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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 tool with seven parameters, two required, no annotations, and no output schema, a three-word description is severely inadequate. It does not explain the tool's purpose in context, how to invoke it, or what the return behavior is, making it essentially unusable without external knowledge.

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%, and the description does not mention or explain any of the seven parameters. The parameter names like 'lat', 'lng', 'chatId' exist in the schema, but the description adds no meaning beyond them, failing to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 'Send a Location' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating a message-sending action. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'send_location_request', which could cause confusion about whether it sends or requests a location.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state prerequisites, target platform, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the schema alone.

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