set_chat_menu_button

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It reveals it is a mutation ('Set') and scope, but does not disclose authorization requirements, constraints on the menu_button JSON object, error conditions, or the effect of omitting chat_id. This leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 sentence that is concise, front-loaded with the action, and contains no superfluous words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 and no annotations, the description should provide more context about return values, errors, and the required format of 'menu_button'. It is too minimal to fully prepare an agent for correct invocation and error handling.

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 description is not required to add parameter details. It does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema descriptions for 'chat_id' or 'menu_button'. Baseline 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 verb 'Set' and the resource 'menu button', specifying scope as 'for a private chat or all chats'. It distinguishes from the sibling 'get_chat_menu_button' by implication (set vs get). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other set_* tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_chat_menu_button'. The description implies it is for setting, but does not mention when to use with chat_id vs omitting it, nor does it provide exclusion criteria.

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