Send Broadcast Campaign

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds only that it targets 'all bot subscribers' and can be scheduled; it says nothing about irreversibility of a sent broadcast, rate limits, partial-failure behavior across recipients, or permission requirements, which is a notable gap for a non-idempotent outbound send.

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 tight sentence with the core action front-loaded and optional capabilities trailing. No wasted words or redundant restatement of the title.

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?

This is a non-idempotent, open-world mutation with six parameters, two of them nested free-form objects (messages and filter) whose inner structure is undefined by the schema, and no output schema. The description explains neither the expected shape of a message object nor what a send returns, so an agent lacks the information needed to invoke it confidently.

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 the schema already documents title, bot_id, filter, account, send_at and messages, and the description only echoes send_at and filter. Baseline 3 is appropriate; the description contributes no additional syntax or format detail 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Send a broadcast message to all bot subscribers') and adds scope ('all bot subscribers') that separates it from point-to-point tools like sendpulse_send_message. It stops short of naming or contrasting with the closest sibling, sendpulse_send_template_campaign, which shares a similar broadcast shape.

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?

'Optionally schedule with send_at or filter recipients' hints at the situations the optional parameters serve, so usage is implied. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this campaign send over sendpulse_send_template_campaign or per-contact sendpulse_send_message, and no stated prerequisites for broadcast sends.

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