Block MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions reading 'last few messages' but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what 'last few' means operationally (e.g., time-based or count-based). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with user data.

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 highly concise with two sentences that directly address purpose and usage, with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and efficiently structured, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's moderate complexity (reading user messages), no annotations, and an output schema (which reduces need to describe returns), the description is minimally adequate. It covers basic purpose and usage but lacks details on behavior and parameters, making it incomplete for fully informed use.

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 has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, and the tool description doesn't mention the 'limit' parameter at all. This fails to compensate for the schema gap, leaving the parameter's meaning and usage unclear beyond its default value of 5.

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 purpose with a specific verb ('Reads') and resource ('last few messages sent to the bot by the user'), making it easy to understand what it does. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'telegram_reply' or 'send_telegram_message', which handle message sending rather than reading.

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 clear context on when to use this tool ('Useful for checking if the user has replied or asked a question'), which helps guide its application. It doesn't specify when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is sufficient for basic usage decisions.

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