send_reminder

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

The description discloses irreversibility and client-facing nature, which are critical behavioral traits. It also mentions permission requirement. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden and does so adequately.

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?

Two sentences, highly concise. The first sentence captures the action and key traits; the second adds usage guidance. No extraneous words.

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 with one parameter and an output schema. The description covers purpose, usage condition, and consequences. It does not mention output format, but that is likely in the output schema. Slightly lacking in parameter details, but overall adequate.

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?

Only one parameter (invoice) with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds no specific guidance on the parameter's format, source, or validation. The context implies it's an invoice identifier, but the description should compensate for the schema gap.

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 states the exact action: email a payment reminder for sent/overdue invoices. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like send_invoice or schedule_send by specifying the reminder context and noting irreversibility.

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 when to use (only after user confirmation) and a prerequisite (requires invoices:send permission). Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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