queues_send_message

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic action. It does not mention idempotency, whether authentication is required, what happens if the queue doesn't exist, or what the output contains.

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 very concise (one sentence, 6 words), which is efficient. However, it is too minimal, lacking necessary details that could make it more helpful without adding much length.

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?

Despite having an output schema and three parameters (two required), the description offers no context about how this tool fits with sibling queue tools, error handling, or the semantics of message sending. It is insufficient for a tool that likely requires the queue to exist and may have specific message format requirements.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; for instance, it does not clarify the expected format of 'body' (e.g., plain text, JSON) or the naming conventions for 'queue_name' and 'region'.

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 'Send a message to a queue' clearly states the action (send) and resource (message to a queue). It is distinct from sibling tools like queues_create_queue, which creates a queue, but lacks additional context such as whether the queue must exist.

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, no prerequisites mentioned (e.g., queue must already exist), and no exclusions. The description provides no context for appropriate usage.

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