telegram_add_alias

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions immediate reflection but lacks details on side effects (e.g., overwriting behavior, uniqueness constraints), required permissions, error handling, or output format. The output schema exists but is not shown, so return value is unknown.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences and an Args section. No wasted words; front-loaded with the purpose and immediate effect.

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 simplicity (2 required params, no annotations, output schema exists but not described), the description adequately covers the core action but omits return value, error cases, and idempotency. Might be sufficient for a straightforward tool but lacks completeness.

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 0%, but description adds concrete examples for both parameters (alias: '현대차', code: '005380'). This provides practical meaning beyond the bare schema, though it does not specify format constraints like 'code must be exactly 6 digits'.

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?

Description clearly states it registers an alias (common term/abbreviation) to a 6-digit code. The verb 'register' and resource 'alias' are specific, and the mapping direction is explicit, distinguishing it from sibling tools like telegram_alias_candidates which likely suggest aliases.

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?

Examples are given but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., telegram_alias_candidates). The description implies immediate effect but does not state prerequisites or when not to use it.

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