Compose Broadcast

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and excels: discloses automatic connect/disconnect from editor, warns that skipping get-tiptap-json-content will overwrite existing content, and notes that switching between compose and update modes is lossy. These are meaningful behavioral traits beyond annotations.

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?

Well-structured with bold headers, bullet lists, and a clear flow. Each sentence earns its place—purpose, recommendation, workflow, when-to-use, important warning, and note. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Despite no annotations or output schema, the description covers purpose, usage workflow, prerequisites, warnings, and limitations. It is sufficiently complete for a tool with 5 parameters (1 required) and no return value expectations.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that content is TipTap JSON and that metadata (subject, preview text, name) can be updated in the same call, reinforcing the schema's parameter descriptions and the combined-use capability.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Set the TipTap JSON content of a broadcast, enabling it to be edited visually in the Resend dashboard editor.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings by labeling it 'the recommended way to set email content' and contrasting with 'update (raw HTML)' mode in the note.

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 explicit 'When to use' bullets (after create-broadcast, for writing/editing/styling content, for dashboard collaboration) and a workflow: get-tiptap-json-content → compose-broadcast. It also gives an exclusion: if broadcast already has HTML content, ask the user before switching to compose mode due to lossy conversion.

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