dispatch_sms_campaign

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: auto-handling of STOP/HELP keywords, TCPA 8am-9pm window enforcement, and the need for Twilio credentials in the secrets vault. No contradictions.

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 three sentences, front-loading the core purpose. Every sentence adds non-redundant information: audience, substitution, auto-handling, TCPA, secrets. No wasted 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?

The description covers audience requirements (phone column), body template placeholders, auto-handling, TCPA, and secrets. However, it does not describe the return value or confirmation behavior (e.g., campaign ID), which would be useful for a dispatch tool. Still, it is largely complete given the absence of an output schema.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all 5 parameters. The tool description adds no new parameter-level information beyond what the schema provides, but it does add external context (e.g., secrets requirement) that indirectly relates to parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Send outbound SMS to the granted audience via Twilio.' The verb 'Send' and resource 'outbound SMS' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like dispatch_email_campaign and dispatch_voice_campaign.

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 context on body template substitution, auto-handling of STOP/HELP, TCPA window enforcement, and secret requirements. It implicitly tells when to use (sending SMS with audience) but does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or compare with siblings.

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