send_create

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'Create send between tracks', omitting side effects (e.g., overwriting existing sends), return values, or required permissions. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 very concise with two sentences plus argument definitions, no redundancy. It is front-loaded with the purpose. Could be slightly more detailed without becoming verbose, but overall efficient.

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 tool, the description covers the basic functionality but lacks details on behavior like duplicate sends, error handling, and further constraints. Given no output schema, more info would improve completeness.

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 adds 'index' to the parameter meanings beyond the schema titles, which is helpful. However, it does not specify valid ranges or indexing scheme (0-based/1-based), leaving some ambiguity.

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 'Create send between tracks', specifying the action and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling 'setup_routing' by noting preference for batch operations, aiding tool selection.

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 explicit guidance to prefer 'setup_routing' for batch sends, indicating when to use an alternative. However, it lacks other usage context like prerequisites or error conditions.

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