pumble_send_dm

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses no behavioral traits beyond the basic send action. Missing details on authentication requirements, message formatting, delivery guarantees, or rate limits. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, no wasted words. Key information is front-loaded: action, target, identity. Suggestions follow logically. Excellent efficiency.

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?

Covers the main usage context: sending a DM as the authenticated user. Mentions prerequisite action (list users). For a simple tool with no output schema and only three parameters, this is largely complete. Lacks error handling details, but acceptable for a basic send operation.

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%, meaning all parameters (text, email, userId) have descriptions in the input schema. The description adds a hint about using pumble_list_users to obtain userId/email but does not enrich parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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 explicitly states sending a direct message to a person in Pumble, using 'your own user'. It distinguishes from siblings like pumble_send_message (channel message) by specifying 'direct message' and from pumble_edit_message (edit). The reference to pumble_list_users further clarifies its role.

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?

Provides clear context: 'as your own user' and suggests using pumble_list_users to find recipient identifiers. Does not explicitly state when not to use (e.g., for channel messages), but the sibling tools imply alternatives. The guidance is practical and helps avoid errors.

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