telegram_send_me

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses: receiver fixed (self), uses collection daemon, auto-splits messages over 4096 chars, returns success count, error if daemon not running. It also advises against multiple calls and to check for typos.

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?

Description is well-structured with bullet points and emphasis, but it is somewhat lengthy. It could be more concise while retaining all information. However, it remains clear and organized.

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?

Output schema exists but not provided; description mentions return value (success + count). For a simple tool, this is mostly complete. However, some details like exact return format or error types could be added.

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 has 1 param with 0% coverage, so description fully compensates. It explains each element is a plain-text message, provides formatting rules, and gives an example. This adds complete meaning beyond 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 it sends messages to the user's own Telegram Saved Messages. The verb 'send' and resource 'Saved Messages' are explicit. It distinguishes from sibling tools, which are mostly data retrieval or management, not sending.

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 explicit when-to-use context: for scheduled briefings like '아침 주식 비서'. It warns against resending or correcting after sending, and specifies plain text only. It implies alternatives (other tools don't send to self).

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