Send DM draft

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly mentions rate limits (hourly, daily, min interval) and required scopes (dm.read, dm.write), along with a re-auth note, which are valuable behavioral traits beyond what the schema indicates.

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 concise, consisting of three short sentences. It is front-loaded with the primary action, followed by important constraints and requirements, with no superfluous information.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core action, approval prerequisite, rate limits, and auth scopes. It could include return value notes, but the provided context is sufficient for a sending action.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for the single 'id' parameter with description 'DM draft id.' The tool description does not add any parameter-specific details, but the schema already sufficiently documents the parameter, so it meets the baseline.

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 action ('Send an approved DM draft') with a specific verb and resource. The inclusion of 'approved' and 'DM draft' distinguishes it from sibling tools like approve_dm_draft or create_dm_draft.

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 draft must be approved and requires specific scopes, giving clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but it is clear that this is for sending an already-approved DM draft.

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