user_telegram_user_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about irreversibility, required permissions, whether the Telegram link or associated data is destroyed, or the preview-vs-execute behavior. 'Отвязать' hints at unlinking rather than hard deletion, but that nuance is left implicit and even conflicts slightly with 'DELETE'.

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?

Very short, but the content is a raw HTTP route plus OpenAPI tag/spec metadata ('Тег: Telegram bot', 'Спека: user') that adds no value for tool selection. Mixed Russian/English also reduces readability without adding information.

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 destructive, unannotated mutation with no output schema, the description should at minimum state the effect on the linked account and any confirmation requirement. Instead it offers only a route and a tag, leaving the agent to infer the destructive semantics from the schema's confirm parameter.

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% and both parameters are documented there (including the confirm/rw-preview semantics and the admin-acts-on-behalf-of-user_id meaning). The description adds no parameter detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('DELETE /telegram/user', 'Удалить (отвязать) Telegram аккаунт пользователя'), which clearly identifies an unlink/delete operation on a user's Telegram account. It does not explicitly contrast with the nearby user_telegram_user_get / user_telegram_user_post siblings, but the verb+resource pairing is unambiguous.

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?

No statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as user_telegram_user_get (inspect) or user_telegram_web_auth_* (link/auth flows). The 'Тег: Telegram bot Спека: user' trailer is documentation metadata, not usage guidance.

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