telegram_send_message

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

With no annotations to carry safety or side-effect information, the description discloses two meaningful behaviors: outbound text is scrubbed for token-shaped secrets, and optional buttons become an inline keyboard. It does not cover all possible behaviors (e.g., parse_mode side effects), but it adds real value beyond a bare 'send message' statement.

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 short sentences with the main action front-loaded and no filler. The token-scrubbing warning and button behavior each earn their place.

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 tool has five parameters, no annotations, and no schema description coverage, so the description carries a heavy load. It covers the core action and a critical gotcha (secret scrubbing), but omits semantics for parse_mode and row_width, which an agent would need to format messages or arrange buttons 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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only clarifies that optional buttons=[{id,label}] produce an inline keyboard, leaving chat_id, text, row_width, and parse_mode unexplained beyond their schema names and types.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Send a text message.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like telegram_get_me and telegram_get_updates, which are read/polling operations, and from telegram_edit_reply_markup, which modifies existing messages rather than creating a new one.

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 makes the core use case clear—sending a message—and implies it should be used whenever the agent needs to post text to a chat. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from siblings such as telegram_answer_callback or telegram_edit_reply_markup.

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