Create Broadcast

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions auto-resolution of channel, but fails to disclose important behaviors: whether recipients are required, what happens if both recipients and recipientSources are provided, or side effects (e.g., persistence, queuing). No mention of permissions or destructive potential.

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, concise and front-loaded with the action verb. Every word contributes, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Despite the tool's complexity (7 params, nested objects, no output schema), the description omits essentials: how to identify the created broadcast (e.g., return value), what if recipients are omitted, and how to subsequently send it. Guidance on edge cases and lifecycle is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by grouping the two recipient approaches and noting auto-resolution, but does not clarify parameter interactions or provide syntax beyond what is in 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 'Create a new broadcast message', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'Send Broadcast' by focusing on creation and explicitly offers two recipient specification methods, making its purpose 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?

The description provides useful when-to-use guidance by explaining the two recipient options and channel auto-resolution. However, it lacks explicit comparison to sibling tools like neuron_send_broadcast or neuron_compose_message, leaving unclear when to create versus when to send or compose.

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