⚠️ Send message

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false. The description adds crucial behavioral details: messages are immediately public, not auto-removed, and can be deleted via another tool. It also explains dryRun and idempotencyKey behaviors, providing context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 paragraph of 4 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and warnings. Each sentence adds necessary context: action, warning, instructions, and alternatives. No redundant or extraneous content.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavioral and usage context. It lacks explicit mention of return value shape, which would be helpful for integration. However, the warnings and parameter sourcing details make it adequately complete for most use cases.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions chat_id source and text length limit, but these are already in schema descriptions. It adds value by noting that chat_id comes from a specific tool, which is helpful but not critical. No new semantic enrichment beyond schema.

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 starts with 'Sends a TEXT message to a chat on behalf of the account', clearly stating the action and resource. It explicitly distinguishes from the image-sending sibling tool by directing to 'messenger_post_send_image_message'. The title includes a warning emoji that reinforces caution.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'send a TEXT message' and alternative for images. It warns about public visibility, advises to confirm text with the user, and mentions deletion capability via messenger_delete_message. This clearly delineates usage context and risks.

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