xtalk_broadcast

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

With no annotations, the description must bear full burden. It discloses the critical behavior of not waiting, but does not mention permissions, idempotency, or potential side effects. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

A single, concise sentence that front-loads the main action and key behavioral trait. No unnecessary words.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core functionality but omits details like default room behavior (handled in schema) and error conditions. It is minimally complete for a simple tool.

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 50% (only 'room' has a description). The tool description does not add any details about parameters, particularly the required 'body' parameter, which lacks semantic context.

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 action (broadcast), the target (all room members), and the key distinction from sibling tools (does not enter waiting state). This effectively differentiates it from tools like xtalk_ask and xtalk_wait.

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 phrase 'without entering a waiting state' provides clear context for when to use this tool vs. alternatives that wait for responses. However, it does not explicitly list exclusions or alternative tools by name.

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