Send Urgent Error

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

Annotations already indicate non-idempotency and non-destructive. The description adds 'Repeated calls may resend', which reinforces the idempotentHint=false. However, it does not disclose authentication requirements or behavior beyond resending.

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 moderately concise but contains typos ('recieved', 'delt') and includes API endpoint details that could be considered extraneous. It could be structured more efficiently.

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 tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and endpoint. However, it lacks details on return format, error handling, and prerequisites, making it minimally complete.

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 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description only reiterates that company_id is required, adding no extra meaning beyond the schema.

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 states the tool sends an urgent error, specifying the context of Company Settings. The verb 'send' and resource 'urgent error' are explicit. However, it could be more specific about the exact nature of the notification or message, and it does not differentiate well from siblings like send_email_project.

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 context on when to use the tool ('related to Company Settings', 'urgent error'), but lacks explicit guidance on alternatives or when not to use. No direct comparison with other send tools is given.

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