pin_message

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

The description discloses required permissions and default chat behavior, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., what happens if message is already pinned, limits on pinned messages, or notification impacts of disable_notification). With no annotations, the description carries full burden and falls short.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and includes necessary context without extraneous detail. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool's low complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description covers core aspects: purpose, permissions, and default. It lacks mention of return behavior (success/failure) but is otherwise adequate for a simple pin 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%, so the schema already provides descriptions for all parameters. The description adds no new parameter meaning beyond repeating the default chat_id behavior. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Pin a message') and resource ('in a chat'), with additional context about permissions and default chat behavior. It effectively communicates the core purpose, though it could be more explicit in distinguishing from sibling tools like unpin_message.

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 provides clear guidance on prerequisites ('Bot must have pin permissions') and default behavior when chat_id is omitted. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or point to alternatives for unpinning.

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