send_message

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

Discloses key behaviors: broadcast via receiver_id=None, priority levels, message type examples, and return value structure. Lacks info on authentication or error details but sufficient for a simple messaging tool given no annotations.

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?

Extremely concise and well-structured. Purpose and parameter list are front-loaded. Every sentence serves a clear purpose with no wasted words.

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?

Covers all parameters and return structure. Output schema is referenced in description (though not inline). Missing usage context but adequate for a tool with this complexity.

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?

Description adds meaning to parameters (e.g., priority levels, message_type examples, broadcast). However, it incorrectly marks caller_agent_id as required (must) while schema allows null, creating a contradiction that reduces reliability.

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?

Description clearly states 'Send messages between agents' (specific verb+resource). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like send_command or broadcast_command, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., send_command, broadcast_command). Missing context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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