teams_chat_send

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

No annotations exist, and the description provides no behavioral details (e.g., delivery guarantees, rate limits, required permissions, or side effects). The simple 'send' verb implies mutation but lacks transparency for an agent.

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, direct sentence with no filler. It efficiently conveys the core functionality, achieving maximum conciseness.

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?

While the tool is simple with only two parameters and an output schema exists, the description omits return value expectations, error behavior, and does not leverage context of sibling tools to aid agent selection.

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?

Both parameters are described in the input schema with 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's 'Chat ID (from teams_chats)' and 'Message content'. Baseline score applies.

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 identifies the action (send a message) and the target resource (Teams chat), and specifies it applies to 1:1 or group chats. This distinguishes it from sibling tool 'teams_send' which sends to channels, though not explicitly stated.

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 like teams_send, teams_chat_messages, or mail_send. No prerequisites, context, or exclusions provided.

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