post_message

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the action and the optional task association, but omits important details such as how 'from' and 'to' work, whether messages are persisted, delivery guarantees, or any side effects.

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 concise, single sentence that effectively front-loads the core action and the one optional modifier. Every word contributes, and no unnecessary detail is present.

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?

For a tool with four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify the relationship between sender and recipients, how the task attachment is used, or how this tool fits with read_messages and task-management siblings. An agent would likely need external knowledge to invoke it 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?

The input schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It mentions 'attached to a task' which clarifies task_id, but does not explain the semantics of 'from' and 'to', nor does it add meaning to 'text' beyond the schema's minLength.

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 tool's function: sending a message to another agent, with an optional task attachment. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_messages (reading) and task-management tools.

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 the usage: use this to send messages to another agent, optionally tied to a task. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like read_messages, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites.

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