openclaw_agent

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses that the tool is not read-only, triggers an agent turn, and auto-generates idempotencyKey. It could mention more side effects but is sufficient.

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?

Two sentences plus a preference note, all front-loaded and concise. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

No output schema, but the description mentions returns the agent's response. It covers wire format, requirements, and preferences. Could be more detailed on error behavior, but adequate given schema coverage.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds value by clarifying that idempotencyKey is logically required though not in schema's required list, and highlights key parameters.

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 tool sends a message to the default agent and returns the response. It distinguishes itself from sibling openclaw_sessions_send by noting this is root-level and uses the default agent.

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?

Explicitly recommends using openclaw_sessions_send for explicit session control, and notes this tool is not read-only and triggers an agent turn, guiding appropriate usage.

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