Send Text To Connected Terminals

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, prerequisites, error cases (e.g., no terminals connected), or rate limits. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 with no wasted words. The main action is front-loaded, and the optional parameter hint is efficiently stated.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and 19 sibling tools, the description is too sparse. It does not explain connectedness, error behavior, or return value. Many sibling tools would benefit from explicit differentiation.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning for sourceNodeId (default behavior if omitted) but provides no extra context for text or submit. Baseline 3 is appropriate given partial compensation.

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 specifies the verb 'send', the resource 'text', and the target 'all connected terminal nodes'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'send_text_to_terminal' (single terminal) and 'send_annotation_to_connected_terminals' (annotations).

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 provides one usage guideline about omitting sourceNodeId to use the selected node, but does not compare to sibling tools or indicate when not to use this tool. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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