batch_send

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and delivers important behavioral details: sequential dispatch with a small anti-rate-limit delay, per-target success/error reporting, and identity behavior (cookie user unless target.via=bot). It doesn't cover permissions or failure continuation, but the core behavioral traits are well disclosed.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence adds value—no filler or redundancy. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 the use case, execution model, identity routing, error reporting, and rate-limit mitigation. While the return format and failure continuation are not explicitly described, the tool's complexity is largely addressed by the detailed input schema and the description's behavioral disclosures.

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 100% for both targets and delay_ms, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by explaining the anti-rate-limit purpose of delay_ms and clarifying the via=bot routing for targets, going beyond the schema's basic parameter 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?

Description clearly states 'Send the same or different content to multiple targets in one call' and explicitly mentions 'Use for broadcast / fan-out scenarios,' making the purpose and scope unambiguous. It also distinguishes this from single-target sibling tools like send_to_user and send_to_group.

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 says 'Use for broadcast / fan-out scenarios,' providing a clear when-to-use signal. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not scenarios, but the contrast with single-target send siblings is obvious. This earns a 4 for clear context without exclusions.

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