send_card_as_user

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

With no annotations, the description discloses bot-only routing, historical naming, and references a server-side disable. Could mention error handling but provides good behavioral context.

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?

One paragraph, front-loaded with purpose, then adds nuanced context. No unnecessary sentences, highly efficient.

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 send tool with no output schema, the description covers identity constraints, version requirement, and card schema reference. Could include return type or error clues but is largely complete.

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%. The description adds value for the 'card' parameter by suggesting to build cards visually and paste the JSON, going beyond the schema's description.

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 it sends an interactive Feishu card via bot identity, distinguishing it from siblings like send_file_as_user or send_post_as_user.

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?

Explicitly states bot-only and that the 'as_user' suffix is historical, implying it's not for user-identity. No direct alternatives listed, but the context is clear given sibling tools for other message types.

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