evolution_message_send_media

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and media source. Missing details like size limits, validation, or whether sending blocks. A mutation tool without annotations should describe side effects or prerequisites.

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, efficient sentence. It is front-loaded with the core action. Could expand slightly without losing conciseness, but current length is appropriate for a simple send operation.

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 complexity (11 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, many siblings), the description is too sparse. It does not mention the response format, success criteria, or interactions between parameters like caption and fileName. The agent lacks enough context to use the tool confidently.

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 minor value by clarifying the 'media' parameter format ('by URL or base64'). It does not explain all parameters like 'delay' or 'quoted', but the schema already covers them adequately.

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 verb 'Send', specifies the resource types ('image, video, or document'), and the method ('by URL or base64'). This efficiently distinguishes it from sibling tools like evolution_message_send_text or evolution_message_send_audio.

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 use for sending media but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. With many sibling send tools (audio, sticker, etc.), the agent would benefit from criteria like 'use for image/video/document; for audio use evolution_message_send_audio'.

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