Send rich text messages to Feishu groups with structured paragraphs, inline links, and user mentions. Organize content by paragraphs for clear formatting.
向飞书群发送富文本消息。按段落组织，每个段落是一组行内元素，支持 text、a、at 三种标签。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | No | 富文本标题（可选） | |
| paragraphs | Yes | 段落数组：外层每个元素是一个段落，内层是该段落中的行内元素列表 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only explains the message structure and tags, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., immediate posting), permission requirements, or response behavior. It also does not describe any error conditions.
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, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose first and then the structure. It is concise with 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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description is adequate but not comprehensive. It explains the core concept and structure, but does not mention usage conditions, prerequisites, or expected outcomes. The schema covers parameter details, so the description is sufficient for a basic understanding.
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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a concise summary of the paragraph and inline-element hierarchy, but the schema already documents this structure and the tag enums. The description adds limited value beyond the schema.
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 states a clear action ('send rich text message') and resource (Feishu group), and describes the message structure (paragraphs with inline elements). This differentiates it from siblings like send_text and send_image, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.
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 rich-text messages with structured paragraphs, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over send_text or send_markdown, nor any exclusions. The context is clear but not exhaustive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.