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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It details polling behavior (backoff, jitter, timeouts), response states, and the requirement for authentication. This is thorough, though it could mention potential side effects or error conditions, but overall strong.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections: a concise summary, then detailed usage and access notes. Slightly verbose but each sentence adds value, and key information (backoff, terminal states) is highlighted.

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 polling tool with a simple schema, the description is thorough: it specifies the polling algorithm, terminal states, timeout handling, authentication, and dependency on create_chat_id_discovery. It effectively covers all aspects an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 covers 100% of parameters, but the description adds value by explaining timeout implications and how to handle the 'pending' status, providing context beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 function: polling a chat ID discovery token until the user interacts with the Telegram bot. It provides specific details like exponential backoff parameters and terminal states, distinguishing it from siblings like poll_chat_id_discovery and create_chat_id_discovery.

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?

Offers explicit guidance: call after create_chat_id_discovery, present the deep_link with render_auth_link first, then poll. It also clarifies what to do in each terminal state, making the usage context very clear.

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