Send message

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint:true and openWorldHint:true. The description adds minimal behavioral context: it indicates the operation sends a message and returns a result dict. It does not contradict annotations, but does not provide additional details like error handling or permission requirements.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) and front-loads the main purpose. However, it sacrifices completeness; a slightly more detailed description could improve clarity without being verbose.

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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, output schema present) and the presence of annotations, the description is minimally complete. It covers the basic operation but lacks context about return values, error conditions, and when to use the tool over siblings.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond that, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 verb 'Send' and the resource 'text and optional attachments to a chat', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'edit_message' (edit) and 'send_message_to_phone' (send to phone). It also mentions 'Success: send result dict' to indicate the return value.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'edit_message' for edits, 'send_message_to_phone' for phone numbers). It only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context from sibling names.

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