sassy_session_send

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses two important behaviors: automatic newline appending and the delete-interceptor scan that rejects delete keywords. It does not mention error behavior or permissions, but for a simple input-sending tool, these two details add significant operational transparency.

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?

Four concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, analogy, key behavior, and safety exclusion. No filler or redundancy.

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 an output schema exists, return-value explanation is unnecessary. The description covers purpose, usage, key behavioral quirks, and alternatives. It lacks explicit error scenarios or prerequisites (e.g., session must exist), but the 'running session' phrasing implies that condition. Overall complete for a low-complexity tool with only two parameters.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that input_text is like typing in a terminal and that newline is appended automatically. It implies `name` is the target session identifier via 'running session', though it does not name the parameter explicitly. This is decent compensation for two straightforward parameters.

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 'Send input to a running session' — a specific verb and resource that clearly differentiates from sibling tools like sassy_session_start, sassy_session_read, and sassy_session_stop. The analogy 'Like typing in a terminal' further clarifies the interaction model.

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?

Explicitly states when NOT to use: 'delete keywords are refused here' and names concrete alternatives 'use sassy_shell or sassy_safe_delete instead'. This gives the agent both an exclusion and a redirection, exceeding the basic context requirement.

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