upservice_send_chat_message

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

Annotations already indicate not readOnly, not idempotent, not destructive. Description confirms 'Send a message' which is consistent but adds no extra behavioral detail (e.g., what happens if room is missing, rate limits, confirmation). Given annotations cover the core safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

One sentence purpose plus a structured Args/Returns section. Front-loaded, but the Args section duplicates schema information. Could be more concise by omitting the parameter list and relying on the schema.

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?

The description provides basic purpose and return type, but lacks explanation of prerequisites, edge cases, or integration with other tools. The schema covers mentions in detail, so the description is minimally complete but not thorough for a messaging tool with complex input.

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 description's Args section merely lists parameter names already defined in the input schema with full descriptions. Schema coverage is effectively 100% (despite context signal showing 0%, all parameters have descriptions). The description adds no new semantic meaning; it is redundant.

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 verb 'Send' and the resource 'message into a specific chat room within a channel'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like upservice_send_channel_message by specifying 'chat room', which is explicit and unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., upservice_send_channel_message, upservice_create_external_message). No mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or fallback scenarios. The agent receives no decision-making context.

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