bond_send

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

With no annotations, the description fully conveys behavioral traits: encryption, rate limiting (10-second), file type whitelist, configurable size limit (256KB). This empowers the agent to anticipate and handle constraints without additional discovery.

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. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose; the second adds critical behavioral constraints. No extraneous words.

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 simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers purpose, security, and limits. It omits potential error handling or confirmation details, but remains largely sufficient.

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 coverage is 100%, already describing both parameters ('message' as optional context, 'filepath' as absolute path). The description adds no new parameter information, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Send a file') and the recipient ('to the connected agent'). It distinctly sets this tool apart from its siblings (bond_accept, bond_decline, etc.), which handle other bond lifecycle steps.

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 when to use the tool (to send a file) but does not explicitly contrast with siblings or provide when-not-to-use guidance. Constraints such as rate limits and size limits are mentioned, which help inform usage decisions.

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