ban_chat_member

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only mentions the default chat behavior, lacking details about side effects (e.g., user removal, message revocation), permissions needed, reversibility, or any rate limits.

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 very short (two sentences) and to the point, but the brevity sacrifices important behavioral context. It could achieve the same conciseness while providing more essential information.

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 lack of annotations and no output schema, the description should explain return values, error conditions, and more context for parameters like 'revoke_messages' and 'until_date'. The current description is insufficient for a mutation 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?

The input schema already covers all 4 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds minimal value beyond reinforcing that chat_id optionality defaults to log group, which is already in 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 action 'Ban a user from a chat' and adds a key detail about defaulting to a log group when chat_id is omitted, making it distinct from siblings like restrict_chat_member or unban_chat_member.

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 usage when targeting a chat or defaulting to a log group, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like restrict_chat_member or how to handle revoke_messages parameter.

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