send_chat_presence

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

With no annotations, the description fails to disclose important behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the presence is automatically cleared after a timeout, if it overrides existing presence, or if there are rate limits. The 'delay' parameter hints at duration but is not explained in 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?

The description is a single sentence, concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary and there is no redundant information.

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 lack of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain the return value or any side effects, such as whether the presence is sent to all chat participants. For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, more detail would improve completeness.

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 75%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the enum values (composing, recording, paused) but they are already present in the schema. It provides no additional context about parameter semantics beyond what the schema already offers.

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 action ('Send') and resource ('typing/recording presence to a chat') and lists the allowed states. While it distinguishes from many siblings that send messages or media, it does not explicitly differentiate from 'set_evolution_presence', but the focus on chat-level presence makes it clear enough.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sending a message or updating chat state. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as an active chat or user permissions, nor any indication of when it is appropriate to send each presence type (e.g., composing vs. recording).

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