send_text

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states this is a write operation, is irreversible, delivers a real WhatsApp message, and is restricted to the 24h window. This is strong, though it does not mention return values or error 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?

Every sentence earns its place: the action, the parameter source, the side effect, irreversibility, and the time window. It is compact, front-loaded, and free of filler.

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 simple two-parameter send tool with no output schema, the description covers the core operational facts: what to send, to whom, the real-world consequence, and the usage restriction. It could add error handling or response information, but those are not critical for basic invocation.

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 compensate. It adds meaning for `user_ns` by pointing to `find_contact` as the source, and for `content` by framing it as free-text. The parameter semantics are sufficiently clarified for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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: 'Send a free-text message to one contact.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_whatsapp_template and trigger_flow, which send templates or trigger flows. The source hint for `user_ns` adds practical clarity.

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?

Provides clear context for use: this is a real WhatsApp message and only works inside the 24h customer-service window. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the conditions and constraints are clearly implied.

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