Search Telegram Contact Directory

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds scoping context (directory search by name/phone/username) but does not disclose the multi-account fan-out behavior that the account parameter implies. Adequate given annotation coverage, but not rich.

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?

Two tight sentences: purpose plus matchable fields front-loaded, then the use-when and the sibling alternative. No filler, no redundancy.

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?

Complete enough for a read-only directory search: an output schema exists so return values need not be described, and annotations cover the safety profile. The only gap is that the multi-account behavior (fan-out vs. default) lives solely in the schema description rather than being reinforced here, but nothing an agent needs to call correctly is missing.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema, including the multi-account fan-out semantics. The description repeats the matchable fields (name, phone number, username) which loosely maps to the query parameter but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. 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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (Telegram contacts directory), and enumerates matching fields (name, phone number, username). It also explicitly distinguishes from the sibling list_contacts, so the agent can pick correctly without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('looking up a specific person') and names the alternative (list_contacts) plus its selection condition ('to view the entire directory'). Routing is unambiguous.

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