send_push

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the recipient modes (identity/objectId) but does not mention delivery behavior, permissions, failure handling, rate limits, or whether the send is immediate or scheduled.

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 filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's core action and targeting mechanism.

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 nested object parameters, lack of output schema, and absence of annotations, the description is too thin. It does not explain the relationship between identity and objectId, expected behavior for invalid recipients, or how this differs operationally from the sibling send tools.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'by identity or objectId' adds a concise high-level summary of the 'to' parameter, but it does not add significant meaning beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 verb ('Send'), a clear resource ('a push notification'), and a specific targeting mode ('directly to specific users by identity or objectId'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling send tools like send_email, send_sms, and send_whatsapp.

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 phrase 'directly to specific users' implies a targeted, direct push use case, contrasting with campaign-based sends. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this over send_email, send_sms, send_whatsapp, or create_campaign, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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