send_embed

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it only states the action without addressing permissions, rate limits, return values, or error conditions. For a mutation tool like this, the lack of any additional behavioral context is a notable gap.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the essential action and object. There is no fluff or redundancy, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 tool has seven parameters and no output schema, but the description only captures the basic purpose and leaves out usage context, output expectations, or prerequisites. The schema covers parameter details, yet the description is otherwise sparse for a tool of this complexity.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all seven parameters, achieving 100% coverage, so the parameter semantics are already well-documented. The tool description itself adds no extra context about how parameters relate, but it doesn't need to since the schema handles this dimension.

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 clearly specifies the action ('Send'), the object ('a rich embed message'), and the destination ('to a channel'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. The qualifier 'rich embed' distinguishes it from the sibling 'send_message', which handles plain text 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?

The description implies usage through the term 'rich embed', which indicates this is for embed messages rather than standard text messages. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus 'send_message' or 'send_dm', nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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