send_moodle_message

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

The description mentions a recipient limit and the underlying Moodle function, but since there are no annotations, it carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not explicitly note that this is a write operation with side effects, nor does it cover authentication, failure modes, or response format, leaving significant 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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the core action and includes a key constraint. It contains no fluff or redundant phrasing, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 small parameter set and lack of output schema, the description is somewhat complete but omits important context such as return values, error handling, and behavior with invalid user IDs. The absence of annotations increases the need for such details, which are not provided.

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 only 33%, and the description does not compensate for the lack of detail on 'text' and 'format'. The max-50 recipient limit is repeated from the schema without adding new meaning. The description adds no significant semantic value beyond what the parameter names and enum already convey.

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 a specific action ('Send a private Moodle message') and identifies the target ('one or more user ids'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_forum_announcement. It also includes a concrete constraint ('Max 50 recipients per call'), making the tool's function unambiguous.

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 private messaging but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions. It lacks references to sibling tools or scenarios where a different communication method would be more appropriate.

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