send_mailing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It hints at a precondition ('validated') but fails to disclose side effects like sending emails to recipients, irreversibility, or behavior on invalid campaigns.

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, which is concise. However, it is under-specified and lacks necessary details, making it less effective than a well-structured, slightly longer description.

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 sending action with likely side effects, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is incomplete. It omits return values, error scenarios, and the full meaning of 'validated'.

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 description adds no meaning for the parameters 'id' or 'limit'. The schema documents 'limit' (max recipients, 0=tous), but 'id' is left completely unexplained, and the description does not compensate.

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 'Envoyer une campagne mailing validée' clearly states the action (send) and resource (mailing campaign), distinguishing it from siblings like create_mailing and get_mailing_stats. However, the qualifier 'validated' is not fully explained, which slightly weakens clarity.

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 create_mailing or get_mailing. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or related workflows.

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