send_payload

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It covers array handling (multi-part with 1s spacing) and 429 retry, referencing a known contract. It does not mention return values, but an output schema exists. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and includes only relevant behavioral details. No fluff or redundancy, making it highly scannable for an agent.

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 low complexity (one parameter, output schema present), the description provides sufficient context: input format, array behavior, spacing, and retry. It doesn't explicitly explain return behavior, but that's covered by the output schema. Sibling differentiation is slightly implicit but adequate.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the payload parameter (object, array, or string). The description adds semantic value by clarifying that an array represents multi-part messages with spacing and retry, which is not evident from the schema alone. The string option isn't mentioned in the description but is covered by 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 ('Post a pre-built Slack webhook payload') and the accepted input format (object or array). The reference to send_to_slack.sh and the sibling tool names (send_markdown, send_message) help distinguish this tool from those, as it focuses on raw payloads rather than formatted markdown or simple messages.

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 for raw, pre-built payloads and explicitly describes the behavior for arrays (multi-part messages). It doesn't explicitly state when to use this over siblings, but the phrase 'pre-built' and the array semantics provide clear context. A direct comparison to alternatives would make it stronger.

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