edit_message_text

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the bot/inline-mode scope and the text-versus-rich_message exclusivity, but omits permissions, failure modes, and what happens to existing formatting or entities.

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?

Two short sentences with no wasted wording, and the core action is front-loaded. The text-versus-rich_message constraint is placed immediately after the purpose statement.

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 10-parameter mutation tool with a nested rich_message object and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not state that a message identifier is needed, does not mention edit limitations, and does not summarize rich_message constraints, leaving most context to the schema.

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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a meaningful constraint not explicit in the schema: pass either text or rich_message. However, it does not clarify chat_id, message_id, inline_message_id, parse_mode, or entities beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Edit the text of a message sent by the bot or via inline mode.' It scopes the operation to bot-sent or inline-mode messages, but does not distinguish it from sibling tools such as edit_message_caption or edit_ephemeral_message_text.

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 only guidance is 'Pass either text or rich_message.' It does not explain when to use this tool versus edit_message_caption, edit_message_media, edit_message_reply_markup, or edit_ephemeral_message_text, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions.

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