send_sms

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

With no annotations, the description covers key behaviors: the intentional misspelling of 'receipents' for backward compatibility, APITEST sender restrictions, scheduling nuances, and the automatic appending of B186 operator code. However, it omits rate limits or error handling details.

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 concise with two sentences and a reference link. It front-loads the main action and provides a reference for details. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) for better readability.

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 complexity with nested objects and no output schema, the description fairly covers the essential behavioral aspects like order handling, sender restrictions, and scheduling. It also includes a reference for additional details, making it reasonably complete.

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?

The description adds minimal parameter info beyond what the input schema already provides. The schema has detailed descriptions for parameters like iys and sender, so the baseline is 3 due to high schema description coverage. The description does mention the 'receipents' misspelling, which is helpful but not critical.

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 tool delivers SMS to one or many numbers in a single request and returns an orderId. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_report or cancel_order by focusing on sending SMS.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, but the purpose is clear. It could mention that for checking delivery reports, use get_report, but overall it's adequate.

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