telegram_post

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not disclose side effects (e.g., that it sends a live message to Telegram), whether it is idempotent, or what happens if the collection has no updates. The verb 'post' implies an external write but lacks explicit transparency.

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, six words long, front-loaded with the action. No filler or redundancy. It is concise and appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description is minimal but covers the core function. However, it lacks usage context (e.g., when to post an update) and does not explain what constitutes an 'update' or how the result is returned. This is sufficient for basic understanding but not fully complete.

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 has 100% coverage for collectionId with its description 'Collection ID'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies. There is no extra context about how to obtain or format the collection ID.

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 'Post a collection update to Telegram' uses a specific verb ('post') and resource ('collection update') with a clear destination (Telegram). It distinguishes from siblings like telegram_commands and loop_post by indicating a specific action on a collection for a Telegram channel.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions. Sibling tools like telegram_commands or loop_post exist, but no comparative context is given.

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