broadcast_command

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

The description contradicts the input schema by marking caller_agent_id as required when it is not in the schema's required array. This is a factual inaccuracy that undermines trust. While it mentions authorization and dangerous commands, the contradiction is a significant flaw.

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 concise, starting with a clear purpose statement, then a usage note, followed by a structured argument list and return format. It is well-organized and easy to scan, though the return description could be slightly trimmed.

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?

With no annotations and an output schema present, the description covers authorization, parameter details, and return structure. However, it lacks explanations of error cases, side effects, or behavior when commands are invalid, leaving some gaps for a complex broadcast tool.

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 description adds meaning to all four parameters (command, role, allow_dangerous, caller_agent_id) with brief explanations and role valid values, which is helpful given 0% schema coverage. However, the incorrect claim that caller_agent_id is required reduces clarity and utility.

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: broadcasting a command to all agents or specific roles. It distinguishes from sibling tools like `send_command` which likely targets a single agent, making the purpose distinct and 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 specifies that only Owner and Admin roles can use the tool, and explains the role parameter with valid values. It provides context on when to use it but lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance.

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