send_message

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

Discloses key behavioral trait: returns once run started (non-blocking). Mentions optional conversationId. Lacks details on error handling, permissions, or rate limits, but the core behavior is clear. No annotations provided.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then behavior, optional param, and follow-up advice. No fluff.

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?

Provides enough context for usage: what it does, how it behaves, and what to do after calling. Lacks return value description and error handling, but acceptable for this tool's complexity.

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 only 33% (only conversationId described). The description adds minimal parameter detail: prompt is implied via 'prompt/revision', but projectId is not elaborated. Does not compensate for low schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states it sends a prompt/revision to the project chat, distinguishing it from related tools like list_conversations or get_status. The verb 'send' and resource 'project chat' are specific.

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 usage guidance: non-blocking nature, optional conversation targeting, and advise to poll get_status for completion. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like new_conversation or iterate.

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