Send Message

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide. It does not mention side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or threading behavior. It is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint false) but does not enrich the agent's understanding.

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, clear sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core purpose without waste.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters (3 required) and no usage guidance, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the roles of space_id, user_google_email, or message_text, nor does it mention threading options beyond what the schema provides. Annotations and output schema do not compensate for the lack of contextual explanations.

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?

The description offers no explanation of parameters. Schema coverage is only 40% (thread_key and thread_name have descriptions), leaving space_id, message_text, and user_google_email undocumented. The description does not compensate for this gap.

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 'Sends a message to a Google Chat space' clearly identifies the specific verb (sends) and resource (Google Chat space). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'send_gmail_message' and Chat read tools such as 'get_messages'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or situations where another tool would be more appropriate. The description only states the basic action.

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