Send Broadcast Channel Message

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

Annotations only indicate it is not read-only and not destructive, so the description needs to disclose more. It states the return value (message ID) and the mutation action, but does not mention potential side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error conditions. It adds some value but leaves gaps.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action, and the Args/Returns structure is clear. It repeats schema info but does so efficiently without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

The tool has only 3 simple parameters and no output schema, so the description covers what is needed: the action, parameters, and return value. It does not mention edge cases, but for a straightforward send operation, it is adequately complete.

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%, and the description largely replicates the schema's parameter descriptions. It does clarify that link_url is optional, but this is already implied by not being in the required list. No meaningful additional semantics 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?

The description clearly states the action (sends a message) and the specific resource (Instagram broadcast channel), which distinguishes it from other message-sending tools like meta_send_instagram_message. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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 usage when targeting a broadcast channel, which is clear enough, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use this tool versus similar ones like meta_send_instagram_message or when certain prerequisites apply. The context is implied rather than stated.

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