Send Test Message to Bot

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent action. The description adds behavior beyond annotations by explaining the roomJid omission causes fan-out to every room and by stating the ai-service dependency. It does not fully describe side effects or response behavior, but it complements the annotation profile well.

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 compact and front-loaded: endpoint, core behavior, essential dependency, and prerequisite source all in a few sentences. No filler or repeated schema information beyond the critical fan-out behavior.

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 send action without an output schema, the description covers the required inputs, optional room behavior, external service dependency, and where to obtain the botInstanceId. It does not describe the response format or success/failure indication, but the essential invocation context is present.

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 coverage is only 60%, so the description must add meaning for botInstanceId and agentIdOrAddress. It contextualizes botInstanceId by pointing to ethora-bot-instances-list as the source, and it restates the important roomJid omit-to-broadcast behavior. agentIdOrAddress remains less explained, but the schema's alias note plus the endpoint path provide enough guidance.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Send a test message from a BotInstance' plus the exact endpoint '/v2/agents/:idOrAddress/bot-instances/:botInstanceId/test-message'. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like ethora-bot-instance-diag or ethora-bot-instance-status.

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?

Provides clear context and prerequisites: 'Requires the ai-service to be running' and 'Requires a bot instance id from ethora-bot-instances-list (instances are created by ethora-agent-invite-to-chat)'. It does not explicitly state when-not-to-use or name alternatives, but it gives enough precondition guidance to select and invoke it correctly.

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