Get chat info

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and open-world behavior. The description adds that the result is an info dict and that forum chats may include topics up to the specified limit, providing some additional behavioral context. However, it does not disclose error handling, permissions, or rate limits.

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 three sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second summarizes success output and special forum behavior, and the third provides a documentation link. It is front-loaded, efficient, and free of redundant content.

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 simple two-parameter tool with high schema coverage, full annotations, and an existing output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the purpose, return type, and special forum behavior without needing to explain return values in detail. The documentation link also supplements any missing specifics.

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 coverage is 100%, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning by specifying that the target can be a user, bot, group, or channel, which clarifies the chat_id parameter domain. It also reinforces the topics_limit behavior for forums, going slightly beyond the schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Load') and identifies the resource ('profile and metadata for one user, bot, group, or channel'), making the tool's function explicit. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_messages and find_chats by specifying it targets a single chat entity.

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 when to use the tool (when you need profile/metadata for a specific chat) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or references to sibling tools are provided, so guidance is only implied.

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