send_button_template

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing beyond the 3-button cap. It is silent on messaging-window/permission requirements, whether the send is idempotent, what happens on failure, and what the call returns.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical constraint is the highest-value information. It is efficient, though arguably too terse for a messaging tool with required structured input.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and three required parameters, the description should explain delivery constraints and expected result. Instead it stops at the payload shape, leaving an agent unable to anticipate platform messaging restrictions or what a successful send yields.

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 description coverage is 100%, so recipient_id, text, and the nested button fields are already documented, making 3 the baseline. The description adds only the coarse mapping of button kinds to URL links and postback triggers, which the schema's enum already conveys.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (send a Button Template message) and defines the payload shape as text plus up to 3 action buttons. It does not name or contrast with close siblings such as send_quick_replies or send_generic_template, so an agent must infer the distinction from the shape alone.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description implies the scenario (you have text plus a few buttons) but gives no rule for choosing this over send_quick_replies, send_generic_template, or a plain send_instagram_dm.

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