send_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It doesn't mention what chat types are supported (private, group, channel), file size limits, whether sending fails silently or throws, or any special handling. For a tool sending files to external chats, this is a meaningful 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 concise sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately short, though it could benefit from one or two additional details on behavior or usage without becoming verbose.

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 existence of an output schema and 100% schema coverage, the description is sufficient for basic invocation. However, with no annotations and a write-action tool (sending external messages), some behavioral context like auth requirements or format expectations would strengthen completeness. It's adequate but relies heavily on structured fields.

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 100%, so all four parameters (caption, chat_id, document, parse_mode) have schema-level documentation. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, landing at the baseline of 3 for full coverage.

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 states a clear verb+resource combination ('Send a file/document to a Telegram chat'). It distinguishes the action of sending documents, which is distinct from siblings like send_message, send_photo, send_location, and send_poll, though it doesn't explicitly compare against them.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like send_photo (which could handle some document types) or how to choose between file URL vs file_id. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. The schema hints at usage but the description provides no decision context.

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