Skip to main content
Glama
mcp-agent-hub

mcp-agent-hub

by LianXia233

send_message

Sends directed or broadcast messages to agents or rooms and links them to tasks, enabling coordinated multi-agent communication and reporting.

Instructions

发送消息。to 可为 Agent 名/'*'(广播),room 为频道名;kind 可用 ('message', 'order', 'report', 'question', 'answer', 'announce', 'handoff', 'escalation', 'system')(order=派令,report=汇报)。task_id 可关联任务。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "send_message"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNo
kindNomessage
roomNo
agentNo
contentYes
task_idNo
metadataNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full disclosure burden. It explains routing semantics (broadcast via '*', task linking via task_id), but it is silent on delivery behavior, whether the recipient must exist, permission requirements, and what happens with an empty 'to'. For a message-sending tool, this leaves most behavioral traits undisclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two compact clauses that front-load the core action and then routing details; there is little waste. The kind enumeration is a bit dense but every item carries meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Because an output schema exists, return values need not be described. Yet with seven parameters, zero annotation coverage, and two parameters (agent, metadata) unexplained, the definition is not fully complete for correctly invoking the tool in ambiguous routing cases.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain to, room, kind, and task_id, but it leaves the 'agent' and 'metadata' parameters entirely undocumented, and it does not resolve how 'agent' differs from 'to' — a materially confusing gap for routing.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description begins with a concrete verb and resource ('发送消息'), which tells an agent exactly what it does, and it lists routing targets (to, room) and message kinds. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from the sibling 'broadcast' tool, and it does not clarify the overlap with 'escalate' or 'dispatch_task'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It implies usage through 'to 可为 Agent 名/'*'(广播)' and by glossing kind values (order=派令, report=汇报), which gives an agent a sense of when to choose a kind. However, it never states when to use send_message rather than the sibling broadcast, escalate, or dispatch_task tools, and it does not cover prerequisites.

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