send_message

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

There are no annotations, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It discloses the ability to target or broadcast, but does not mention message persistence, delivery semantics, or any side effects. It is minimally transparent.

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?

Three sentences, but the second and third sentences repeat the broadcast idea. Still concise and front-loaded, though not maximally efficient.

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?

For a simple messaging tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose but omits details like whether messages are stored, delivery guarantees, or how to confirm sending. Given the presence of related siblings (get_messages, broadcast_message), more context could help.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so baseline applies. The description does not add any details about parameters beyond the schema; it merely mentions broadcast which is already in the schema.

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 ('Send a message') and the resource ('another agent'), including the broadcast option. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'broadcast_message', which may cause confusion about when to use which.

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?

It provides context that this is for communication between agents on the same project, but does not specify when to use this tool instead of alternatives like 'broadcast_message' or 'get_messages'. No exclusions or conditions are given.

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