send_event

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the automation enrollment effect and payload exposure, but omits failure modes (e.g., missing contact, invalid event name), side effects, or idempotency. Critical behavioral context is missing.

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, front-loaded with the core action ('Fire a custom event'), and each sentence provides essential information without redundancy. Highly concise and structured.

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?

The description explains the automation trigger and payload exposure, but missing output details (no output schema) and fails to mention required parameters like 'contactId' or 'contactEmail'. For a tool with 6 parameters, more context on constraints and expectations is needed.

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%, so parameters are documented in the schema. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not mention parameters or their interplay. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states the specific action ('Fire a custom event') and the resource ('for a contact'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'send_email' or 'send_broadcast'. It also explains the mechanism of triggering automations, which differentiates it from 'enroll_in_automation'.

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?

The description implies usage for firing custom events to trigger automations, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'enroll_in_automation' or specify when not to use it. The guidance is clear enough for basic use but lacks exclusionary criteria.

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