send_sms

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It notes that each request is an order and returns an orderId, but lacks info on auth requirements, rate limits, or potential destructive actions beyond the implied write operation.

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 extremely concise with two sentences covering the main action, response, and a constraint (one order per request), plus a reference link. No wasted 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?

The tool has a complex schema with conditional fields (iys, iysList, APITEST restrictions) and Turkish legal requirements, but the description does not address these nuances or prepare the agent for proper usage, leaving the schema to carry the full burden.

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 mentions 'order' and 'sender' but adds minimal insight beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., sender per order, orderId in response). The schema's own descriptions are detailed, so the tool description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 identifies the tool as delivering SMS to one or many numbers using a single request, with a distinct order concept and orderId response. This verb+resource+scope is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like cancel_order or get_report.

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 mentions using the returned orderId to retrieve reports or cancel orders, implying follow-up actions, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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