get_chat_info

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

The description notes a fallback mechanism ('Official API + User Identity fallback') and lists returned fields, but does not disclose authorization requirements, readonly nature, or error behavior. Since no annotations exist, more transparency would be beneficial.

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 sentences, front-loaded with key context, every word carries weight. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 no output schema, the description appropriately lists the returned fields. It could mention membership requirements or error conditions, but overall covers the essentials for a simple retrieval tool.

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% and the schema already describes the chat_id parameter. The description reinforces the accepted formats but does not add significant new meaning beyond the 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 the tool gets chat details including name, description, member count, and owner, with explicit support for two ID formats. It distinguishes from siblings like list_chats.

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 mentions the supported ID formats (oc_xxx and numeric) as a usage hint, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_chats or list_members.

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