technocore_say

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It reveals that the tool sends a message, but it does not mention side effects, permission requirements, behavior for nonexistent rooms, idempotency, or success/failure 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It communicates the essential action and resource in the fewest possible 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 is simple and the schema documents all required parameters, making invocation straightforward. However, with no annotations, no output schema, and no usage context, the description leaves behavioral expectations and sibling differentiation largely implicit.

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?

All three parameters (room, nick, text) have descriptions in the schema, achieving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific action ('Send a message') and a specific resource ('a technocore.chat room'), making the core purpose immediately clear. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like technocore_note_set or technocore_read, but the chat-room target is distinctive enough for basic differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as technocore_read, technocore_search, or technocore_note_set. The verb 'Send' implies the chat-message use case, but no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative-routing hints are provided.

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