genie_send_message

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, and the description aligns with a write operation. However, it fails to disclose additional behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or idempotency. Given minimal annotations, the description provides only basic context.

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?

A single sentence conveying essential information with no redundancy. It is concise, though additional details could be added without compromising brevity.

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 presence of an output schema, missing return value info is acceptable. However, the description omits error conditions, required permissions, and any nuance about the message creation process, making it somewhat incomplete for a write tool.

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?

With 75% schema coverage, the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The undocumented query_parameters parameter is not explained, so the description does not compensate for the schema gap.

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?

Description clearly states the action (send), resource (follow-up message), and context (existing Genie conversation). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like genie_start_conversation (start new) and genie_get_message (retrieve).

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 usage for follow-up messages but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, such as genie_start_conversation. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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