cigchat_send_fb_utility_template

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool sends a real message (real-world consequence) and requires the 'Manage Flow' scope (auth). However, it does not mention irreversibility, rate limits, or whether the recipient must be subscribed, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and endpoint, followed by a critical warning and permission note. Every sentence adds essential information without waste.

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 tool that sends a real message with a nested object schema, the description lacks critical context: what the template fields mean, prerequisites (e.g., approved template), potential errors, or return behavior. No output schema exists, and the description does not explain outcomes.

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 0%, but the description provides no explanation of the 'content' or 'user_ns' parameters, nor the nested fields like 'lang' and 'name'. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 Facebook utility message template to subscriber' with the endpoint path included. It clearly identifies the resource (Facebook utility message template) and the target (subscriber), distinguishing it from broadcast tools that target tags or lists.

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: 'Delivers a real message to a person' and requires 'Manage Flow' scope. This implies single-recipient use and permission requirements, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool compared to similar send tools.

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