Post a new message to a Basecamp 2 project with subject, body, and optional privacy setting.
Post a new message to a Basecamp 2 project
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | Message body (HTML supported) | |
| private | No | Whether the message is private (default false) | |
| subject | Yes | Message subject / title | |
| project_id | Yes | The project ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states that a message is posted, but does not disclose permissions, side effects, whether notifications are sent, or any other operational context.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately communicates the action and target resource.
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?
For a simple create operation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. However, with no annotations and no usage guidance, it leaves important behavioral and routing context unaddressed.
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 all four parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which meets the baseline for high schema coverage.
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 a specific verb and resource: posting a new message to a Basecamp 2 project. It is clearly distinct from retrieval siblings like get_message, but it does not explicitly differentiate usage from other create tools such as create_todo.
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 is given about when to use this tool versus siblings or alternatives. The create intent is implied only by the word 'Post' and the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.