preview_announcement

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the key behavioral trait: "Sends nothing." It also explains the output behavior (render and instructions to send). While it doesn't mention other side effects, the primary safety concern (unintentional sending) is explicitly addressed.

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 two short sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core function (render) and immediately adds the critical caveat (sends nothing). Every word earns its place.

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 preview tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the essential behavior. It explains what it does (render) and what it doesn't do (send). It doesn't describe the return format in detail, but that is not critical given the tool's simplicity and the self-explanatory parameters.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter-level detail. The parameter names (course, title, message) are self-explanatory, but the description does not clarify expected formats, types, or relationships beyond what the names imply. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool renders what would be sent and explicitly says "Sends nothing," distinguishing it from sibling send tools. The verb "Render" and the object "what would be sent" make the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies this tool is for previewing an announcement without actually sending it, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of send_announcement or create-announcement. No exclusions or alternatives are named, so the usage context is only implied.

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