Send message to session

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

The description says the tool sends a message but does not disclose whether the message is delivered immediately, whether it triggers actions, whether a response is returned, or what side effects may occur. Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-idempotent but the description adds little about actual behavior.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant filler. It conveys the core purpose efficiently and is easy for an agent to parse.

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?

For a simple two-parameter send tool, the essential calling information is present in the schema and description. However, the lack of usage guidance and side-effect disclosure leaves moderate ambiguity for an agent trying to decide whether and how to invoke it 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?

Both parameters are fully described in the input schema, so the description adds little beyond that. The phrase 'clarification or instruction' gives some context to the message parameter, but it does not explain format, length, or behavioral expectations.

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 a specific action ('send') and target ('clarification or instruction to a Jules session'), which clearly identifies the tool's purpose. It distinguishes it from query-style siblings like jules_get_session, though it overlaps slightly with jules_approve_plan since both can involve directing a session.

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 is for clarifications or instructions, but it does not say when to prefer it over alternatives such as jules_approve_plan or jules_create_session. No exclusions or routing guidance is provided.

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