send_message

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

The description only states the action and return type. It does not disclose whether the queue must exist, what happens on failure, whether the operation is idempotent, or any side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and falls short.

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 very concise and well-structured with an Args/Returns section. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose. However, it omits important usage context that would enhance completeness, so it's not a perfect 5.

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 tool is simple, but the description lacks critical context such as requiring the queue to exist (created via create_mns_queue), what the returned result string contains, and error handling. This leaves the agent under-informed for invoking the tool successfully.

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 description includes Chinese explanations for both parameters ('Queue name' and 'Message content'), but these essentially restate the parameter names. With 0% schema description coverage, the description provides minimal additional meaning but doesn't clarify formats, constraints, or edge cases.

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 'Send a message to the specified queue' (发送消息到指定队列). This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_mns_queue, receive_and_delete_messages, and list_queues.

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 usage is implied by the name and purpose, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it vs alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites such as the queue needing to exist before sending. No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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