chatgpt_submit_prompt

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

Without annotations, the description discloses a valuable behavioral detail: infinite waiting for Pro tiers and timeoutMs only for normal tiers. However, it omits other behavioral aspects such as return value, error handling, or the exact behavior when wait=false.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every sentence adds meaningful information. It is concise without redundancy.

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 absence of annotations and an output schema, the description leaves important gaps: it does not explain return values, the behavior when wait=false, or how 'Pro' status is determined. For a mutation tool with two parameters, this is incomplete.

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 schema has no descriptions for the two parameters, and the description only enriches timeoutMs by explaining it applies to normal tiers. The wait parameter's semantics (e.g., whether it controls waiting at all) are not clearly addressed, leaving a gap for one of the two parameters.

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 sends the prompt currently in the input box and optionally waits for ChatGPT's response, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from write_prompt (which writes) but does not explicitly differentiate from the similar sibling send_message, so sibling differentiation is incomplete.

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 the tool should be used after a prompt has been written to the input box, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like send_message or get_latest_response. No exclusions or preferred contexts are stated.

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