Edit message

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, but the description adds rich behavioral context: the restriction to the authenticated account's messages, text-only limitation, explicit success/error dict shapes (including status='edited' and edit_date), and parse_mode side effects (rich messages setting rich=true). No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by constraints, return format, and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value and the structure is logical, despite the length. No fluff or 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?

The description is complete for a mutation tool: it covers purpose, constraints, success/error formats, usage alternatives, and links to full documentation. The schema covers parameter syntax, and annotations cover safety hints. Nothing essential 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 the schema already documents all parameters fully. The description does not add new meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates parse_mode behavior already covered. Thus the baseline 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 opens with 'Replace the text of an existing message in a Telegram chat,' a specific verb+resource+action. It clearly distinguishes from siblings by stating 'Use edit_message to update a previously sent message; use send_message to create new ones.'

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 explicitly names the alternative tool (send_message) for creating messages. It also provides when-not-to-use constraints: 'Only works on messages sent by the authenticated account' and 'Cannot edit media or other message attributes — text only.'

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