Send Sticker

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint: false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint: false). The description adds the constraint that the sticker URL must be publicly accessible and PNG/WebP recommended, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't disclose other behaviors like typing simulation delay or error handling.

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?

Two short sentences with no redundancy; the core purpose is front-loaded and the additional constraint about the URL is directly relevant. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple send operation, the description and schema cover the essentials: parameters, purpose, and key constraint. It lacks explicit differentiation from send_media and doesn't mention response behavior, but given the straightforward nature and good schema, it's mostly 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?

The input schema has 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for number, sticker_url, and delay. The description only reiterates the URL accessibility requirement already present in the schema, adding no significant meaning beyond the structured fields.

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 'Send a WhatsApp sticker' – a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like send_media or send_audio by explicitly naming the sticker purpose and the URL requirement.

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?

Provides context that this tool sends stickers and that the URL must be publicly accessible, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over send_media or mention exclusions. Usage is implied rather than clearly bounded.

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