Send Template by Phone

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true). The description adds only that the template must be pre-approved and that the channel is WhatsApp. It says nothing about message delivery semantics, failures, duplicate sends (relevant given idempotentHint=false), or rate limits.

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 well-formed sentence with the differentiator front-loaded. No filler and nothing that should be pushed later.

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 a 6-parameter mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers the core intent but omits the components/template-variable story and any hint of the result of a send. Adequate to select the tool, thin on how to invoke it fully.

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 67%, so several parameters are documented inline (phone, bot_id, template_name, account). The description reinforces the phone-centric usage but does not clarify the opaque 'components' array (required for template variables) or the language_code default, which are the least self-evident inputs.

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?

Specific verb (Send) plus resource (pre-approved WhatsApp template) and the distinguishing mechanic: direct-by-phone without a contact ID. This implicitly separates it from the sibling sendpulse_send_template, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'without needing a contact ID' — an agent can infer this is the path when it only has a phone number. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no named alternative to route between.

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