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

With all annotations false, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the full flow: returns QR code, then polling until connected. It also notes the 2FA limitation and re-auth path. While it doesn't mention potential side effects like creating a new connection record, it gives sufficient behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 moderately long but each sentence carries necessary information: the core action, the QR scanning path, the 2FA exclusion, and re-auth usage. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and avoids fluff, though slightly more verbose than strictly needed.

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 connect tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential steps: returning a QR image, polling, the 2FA caveat, and account_id usage. It doesn't detail error handling or timeouts, but given the tool's simplicity and schema coverage, it is adequately complete.

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 already fully describes account_id with 100% coverage, including its purpose and how to obtain it. The description restates this usage but doesn't add new semantic meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 connects or reconnects a Telegram account via QR code, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from account_connect (browser link for 2FA) and account_connection_status (polling), making it unambiguous among the sibling tools.

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?

Explicitly states when NOT to use this tool: accounts with 2FA must use account_connect. Also provides guidance on using account_id for re-authentication of existing accounts and mentions polling account_connection_status. This gives clear decision rules for the agent.

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