sns_publish

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states only the basic action and does not disclose potential side effects, delivery semantics, permission requirements, or what the response contains. For a publish operation, this is a significant gap.

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, short sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose without any unnecessary words. It is concise and appropriately structured.

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?

The tool is relatively simple and has a complete schema, but there is no output schema and no annotations. The description does not mention return values (e.g., a message ID), prerequisites beyond the ARN, or any LocalStack-specific behavior. It is minimally acceptable but leaves some context gaps.

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%, with each parameter (message, subject, topicArn) already having a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Publish'), the resource ('a message to an SNS topic'), and the context ('in LocalStack'). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like sns_create_topic or sqs_send_message.

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 implies the tool is used to send messages to an SNS topic but does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., that the topic must already exist). Some guidance is implied by the verb 'publish' and the mention of 'SNS topic', but no exclusions or comparisons are provided.

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