Send Message

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It mentions support for markdown and HTML formatting and hints at prerequisites (tokens from send_media for attachments). However, it does not disclose potential side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or the immediate behavior of message sending. Some behavioral traits like notification defaults are not addressed.

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 three sentences long and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every sentence provides essential information without fluff. It is well-structured and easy to read.

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's complexity (7 parameters, nested attachment types) and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the main use cases, provides necessary context for target selection, and flags requirements. However, it could benefit from mentioning return values or error handling, but overall it is adequate.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying mutual exclusivity of chat_id/user_id and recommending use of send_media tokens. However, it does not provide additional syntax or examples for the complex attachments parameter beyond what the schema already details.

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 states the tool's purpose: 'Send a text message to a MAX chat or user.' It distinguishes between group chats and direct messages by specifying the use of chat_id or user_id. This is specific and differentiates from siblings like send_media.

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 provides clear guidance on how to use the tool: 'Provide either chat_id (group chats/channels) or user_id (direct messages), not both.' It also mentions using attachments from send_media. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare with alternatives like send_media or send_action.

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