send_webex_message_with_mentions

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states it sends a message and returns a standardized response, but does not specify precedence among text/markdown/html, error handling, or idempotency. Basic behavior is clear, but more depth is needed.

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 front-loaded with a clear first sentence and organized into Args and Returns sections. While a bit verbose, every sentence adds value. Could be tightened, but structure aids readability.

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 no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main use case with parameter explanations and return type. It misses content type precedence and error responses, but is complete enough for typical usage.

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 the description fully compensates. Each parameter is explained with purpose, constraints (e.g., OR condition), and the mentions structure is detailed with keys and allowed values. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw 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 starts with 'Send a message to a Webex room or person with proper mention support,' which clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'send_webex_message' by focusing on mention support.

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 explains parameter usage, e.g., 'use this OR to_person_id/to_person_email' and details the mentions structure. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like send_webex_message or state when not to use this tool.

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