get_recent_media

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry full burden. It mentions the return format, the limit cap (200), and absolute paths. However, it lacks transparency on failure modes (e.g., what if chat not found?), auth requirements, or whether the operation is non-destructive. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise and well-structured with 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. No unnecessary words, every sentence adds value.

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 tool has 4 parameters and an output schema exists, the description covers the core functionality well. It provides return format and key constraints. Minor gaps: no error handling info, but sufficient for typical usage.

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%, so the description fully compensates. For each parameter, it adds meaningful context: chat (accepts id/username/title), limit (default 20, max 200), kind (optional filter with examples), dest_dir (default from env). This goes well beyond the raw 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 'Download the most recent media items from a chat.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'download_media' by focusing on recency and bulk download. A concrete use case (Arcanara Juni-Treffen photos) is provided.

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 implies the tool is for quickly downloading recent media ('fast path'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'download_media' for specific items, or 'search_messages' for broader searches). No when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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