search_telegram_channel

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

Given the absence of annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the use of Telethon (MTProto) and required tokens, but does not cover potential limitations (e.g., rate limits, pagination behavior, or error handling beyond the response structure). The description adds some context but is not exhaustive.

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 well-structured, with separate sections for purpose, requirements, arguments, and return value. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is fairly complete. It covers prerequisites, parameter formats, and return fields. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no mention of error conditions or rate limits), but overall it provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool 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 coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates. It explains that 'channel' can be a @username, chat_id, or invite link; 'query' is the search query; and 'max_results' has a default of 10 and range 1-100. This adds meaningful guidance beyond the bare schema.

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 it searches messages in a specific Telegram channel, using a specific verb ('Поиск сообщений') and identifies the resource ('конкретном Telegram канале'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'search_telegram' (which likely searches across channels) and 'get_telegram_channel_info' (which retrieves metadata).

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 lists prerequisites: tokens (TELEGRAM_BOT_TOKEN, TELEGRAM_API_ID, TELEGRAM_API_HASH) and that the bot must be added to the channel. It also specifies argument formats (e.g., channel as @username, chat_id, or invite link). However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use this tool.

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