lark_send_message

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

无注解提供，描述仅说明基本功能，未揭示任何行为特性如权限要求、错误处理或副作用（如是否幂等）。对于无注解的工具，描述应承担更多责任，但此处未做到。

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?

一句话简洁明了，没有冗余，但稍显简短。不过简洁性良好。

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?

在无输出模式和无注解的情况下，描述未提及返回值、错误或确认信息。对于发送消息工具，应至少说明是否返回消息ID。完整性不足。

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?

输入模式已覆盖100%参数且有描述，描述本身未添加超出模式的新语义。基线为3，合理。

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?

描述明确指定了动词'发送'和资源'文本消息到飞书群聊或指定用户'，与兄弟工具如lark_get_messages（获取消息）和lark_list_chats（列出群聊）有明显区分。

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?

描述未提供任何关于何时使用该工具、何时不使用或与其他工具比较的指导。缺少使用场景说明。

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