unban_chat_member

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action and gives no information about side effects, required permissions, error conditions, or return behavior. For a mutating operation, this is a significant gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is extremely concise and easy to parse.

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?

Despite being a simple tool with only two parameters, the absence of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions leaves the description incomplete for safe invocation. It does not convey permissions, error handling, or any behavioral nuances beyond the literal action.

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%, and the description does not mention or explain the parameters chat_id and user_id. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no value beyond the schema, failing to compensate 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 'Unban a user from a chat' states a specific action (unban) on a specific resource (user in a chat). It is unambiguous and clearly distinguishes from siblings like ban_chat_member (opposite action) and get_chat_member (read action).

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 implies the use case (when you want to unban a user) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It does not mention that it is the inverse of ban_chat_member or that it only applies to banned users.

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