send_to_group

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavior. It states it searches and sends, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., whether the message is sent immediately), error handling if group not found, or any permissions required. The ats parameter is not explained in the description, leaving behavior ambiguous.

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 extremely concise, using a single sentence to convey the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the user identity hint and the search-then-send flow. However, it sacrifices important details, making it too terse for full clarity.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more contextual completeness. It does not explain return values, error cases, or how the group search works. Compared to sibling messaging tools, this description is insufficient for an agent to confidently select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the input schema already describes all three parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage. No extra context is provided for group_name, text, or ats.

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 it searches group by name and sends text message, specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like send_to_user or send_as_user, which also send messages but to different targets.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, such as whether the group name must be exact or if the user must already be a member. The description implies usage context but provides no explicit exclusions or comparisons.

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