api_scrape_channel

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'scrape' and 'fast and efficient', providing no information about rate limits, authentication requirements, whether it is read-only, or what data is returned. This is a significant gap for a tool that interacts with an external service.

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 short sentence of eight words, making it concise and front-loaded. However, the phrase 'fast and efficient' is vague and does not add actionable value, so it is not as tight as it could be. Still, it avoids unnecessary length and gets to the point.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must provide essential context about return values and behavior. It does not mention what the scrape returns (e.g., posts as JSON), nor does it explain how date filters or max_posts affect the output. Given the complexity of a scraping tool, this description is insufficient.

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 provides complete descriptions for all four parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level details, but the schema already explains url, date range, and max_posts. Therefore, the description does not need to compensate, and a score 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 ('scrape') and the resource ('Telegram channel'), and mentions 'using the API' which differentiates it from manual scraping tools. However, it does not specify the exact scope or output, nor does it contrast with all siblings. The phrase 'fast and efficient' is a general trait rather than a precise differentiator.

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 is provided about when to use this tool over alternatives like scrape_channel, scrape_channel_full, or api_search_channel. The only implied hint is 'fast and efficient', but this is not a clear recommendation, and there is no mention of exclusions or specific use cases.

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