FORWARD_MESSAGE

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the basic action without disclosing important behaviors like whether the user must be a member of both chats, if the original message content is preserved, or if there are any rate limits. The agent has no insight into side effects or setup requirements.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and key objects. Every word is functional, but it might be too brief and could benefit from a second sentence for clarity.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, output schema, and complexity of forwarding (which involves two chats and message IDs), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens if the message is deleted, if the user lacks permissions, or return behavior. Sibling tools are listed but no comparison is made.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter has a description within the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema fields; it merely summarizes the action. No new parameter constraints or usage tips are given.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Forward' and resource 'a message from one chat to another', making the action obvious. However, it doesn't differentiate from the sibling SEND_MESSAGE (which sends new messages) beyond the verb. No additional context like 'preserving original sender' is given.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like SEND_MESSAGE, or when not to use it. The description is purely declarative without any context about prerequisites, restrictions, or comparison to siblings.

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