sms_drought_alert

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

Highlights destructive side effect ('sends real SMS in production') and sandbox option, but does not cover other behaviors like rate limits, costs, or failure modes.

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?

Very concise: three sentences with purpose, warning, and parameter meanings. No wasted words, information is front-loaded.

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 simple SMS sending tool, the description covers purpose, parameters, and destructive behavior. Missing return value description, but given no output schema, it's adequate.

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?

Adds valuable details beyond the schema: phone_numbers format (E.164), message max length (160 chars), and sender_id requirement. Schema only provides basic types.

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 'Send a drought alert SMS via Africa's Talking.' Uses specific verb (send) and resource (SMS), and distinguishes from sibling tools (get_drought_alerts, get_drought_status) which are read-only.

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?

Explicitly warns about destructive nature and provides sandbox testing guidance. However, lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions.

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