send_intake_form

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states 'send' without mentioning side effects (e.g., does it send an email? create a record?), return value, or requirements like email deliverability. This is a significant gap for a mutating action.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. The second sentence efficiently conveys the parameter requirement. No wasted words.

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 moderate complexity, the description covers the purpose and the key parameter logic. However, without annotations or an output schema, it lacks information about return values, side effects, and any prerequisites. This leaves room for ambiguity in agent invocation.

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 each parameter is documented. The description adds extra value by clearly expressing the mutually exclusive relationship between ClientId and ClientName+ClientEmail, which is not fully explicit in the individual parameter descriptions. This improves parameter understanding.

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 action 'Send an intake form to a client' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_intake_forms and get_form by focusing on the sending action.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: to send an intake form to a client. It also specifies the parameter combination rule (QuestionnaireId plus either ClientId or ClientName+ClientEmail), which guides usage. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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