send_queue

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses critical behaviors: skipped tags (sent, no-oa-pdf), auto-tagging of unavailable PDFs to prevent retries, and automatic batch splitting under email limits. This fully informs the agent of side effects and constraints.

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?

Very concise: main action in first sentence, followed by essential behavioral details and sibling reference. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 no parameters and presence of output schema (implied), the description covers all necessary aspects: action, scope, exclusions, side effects, and alternative tool. It is fully sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so description need not explain them. Baseline 4 applies since schema coverage is trivially 100% and no parameter details are required.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Send EVERY unsent paper in the Zotero Reading Queue.' It distinguishes from sibling tool send_papers by stating 'for specific papers use send_papers,' making the tool's scope clear.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('flush the whole queue') and when not to ('for specific papers use send_papers'). Also advises checking list_queue first when unsure, providing clear guidance on usage context.

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