dsh_send_message

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses blocking behavior and result content (assistant text, token usage), which is helpful. However, it omits the polling and timeout behavior hinted at by the parameters, and gives no error semantics.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the action, then adding key result details. No wasted words.

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 tool has no annotations or output schema, and the description leaves out parameter explanations and operational details like timeout behavior or session_id requirements. This is insufficient for a 4-parameter blocking tool.

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 schema has 0% parameter coverage and the description does not explain any parameter. Only 'prompt' is contextually implied; session_id, timeout_s, and poll_interval_s are never described, leaving the agent to guess their meaning and roles.

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 uses a specific verb 'Send' with a clear resource 'prompt to a DSH session' and adds important behavioral detail about blocking until completion. This distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on session creation, stats, or resumption.

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?

Usage is implied: sending a prompt requires an existing session, so the user must know to create/resume one first. However, the description does not explicitly state prerequisites, alternatives, or when not to use this tool, leaving the agent without clear guidance.

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