Send a message to customer support

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

The description discloses the critical dry-run behavior: without confirm:true, the tool returns a preview and makes no network call. This adds valuable context beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation, which indicates mutation potential. The annotation and description are consistent.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no filler. Every sentence adds value.

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 action tool with rich schema annotations and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the key behavioral nuance (dry run vs. actual send) that an agent needs to know before invoking. It could potentially mention when to use this over sibling tools, but the absence is not critical given the tool's straightforward purpose.

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 already covers all four parameters with detailed descriptions, including the confirm flag's role. The description's mention of confirm:true reinforces the schema but doesn't add new parameter-level detail. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a message to Crown Town Compost customer support, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like report_missed_pickup and skip_service by focusing on general support contact.

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 does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as report_missed_pickup or skip_service. However, the intended use is implied by the verb 'send a message to customer support,' and the dry-run note clarifies how to safely test the tool.

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