forward_messages

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

Given no annotations, the description explains key behavioral traits: forwarding with or without 'forwarded' header (as_copy), dropping captions, and silent sending. This adds significant 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 concise and structured as a docstring with an Args section. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and then lists parameters. Some minor redundancy (e.g., 'Args' label) 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?

With 6 parameters, no enums, and an output schema present, the description covers all parameter semantics and behavioral aspects. It could mention the return value briefly, but the output schema handles that.

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 0%, but the description explains all 6 parameters (from_chat, to_chat, message_ids, silent, as_copy, drop_captions) with meaningful details, fully compensating for the lack of schema 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 forwards messages from one chat to another, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like send_message or forward_media_to_saved.

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 a list of parameters but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives or when not to use it. The purpose is clear enough to infer usage.

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