telegram_get_updates

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

With no annotations, the description takes on the disclosure burden and does it well: it reveals long-polling, agent-managed offsets, and the conditional safety classification output. It stops short of a 5 by omitting things like rate limits, webhook conflicts, or error behavior.

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?

Two dense sentences front-load the core operation and then add the two most important behavioral details: offset-loop ownership and the SAFETY_STRICT behavior. No filler, no 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 output schema covers the return shape and the description covers key behavior, so the agent is not entirely lost. But for a tool with three parameters and 0% schema coverage, the lack of limit/timeout semantics and any prerequisites makes it incomplete for fully correct invocation.

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%, and the description only meaningfully explains the offset concept via 'agent owns the offset loop.' Limit and timeout are left completely unexplained, so it only partially compensates for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Long-poll getUpdates') and conveys the core nature of the operation. This clearly separates it from siblings like get_me, get_chat, and send_message, which serve obviously different purposes.

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 provides operational context by telling the agent it owns the offset loop and by explaining the SAFETY_STRICT conditional behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or when not to use it, leaving selection guidance mostly implied.

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