send_message

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

Annotations already mark this as a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds that the destination chat is fixed from server settings, which is useful behavioral context. It doesn't contradict annotations, but doesn't elaborate on delivery guarantees or error handling. With annotations covering the safety profile, the added value is moderate.

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?

Three short sentences: the purpose is front-loaded, followed by typical use cases and a constraint. Every sentence contributes, with no redundancy or filler.

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 description covers the core action, use cases, and a critical limitation. The schema and output schema handle parameter details and return format. While it doesn't mention rate limits or authentication, these are likely implicit given the bot context. Overall, it's complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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%, with each parameter (text, format, silent, link_preview) having detailed explanations. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance, but the schema already handles this, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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: 'Send a message to the user in Telegram on behalf of his bot.' It specifies the verb, resource, and context, making the tool's purpose unambiguous even without siblings.

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?

It explicitly lists suitable use cases ('notifications: routine summary, completion of a long task, found problem, need answer') and a key constraint (chat comes from server settings, cannot be selected). While it doesn't state when not to use it, the provided context is clear and actionable.

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