Change the description / about text

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

The description mentions the 255-character limit (already in schema) and the target resource, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits like permission requirements or whether the operation overwrites existing text. With openWorldHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description adds minimal context beyond them.

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 a single concise sentence that is immediately clear and free of extraneous information.

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 is simple and the description covers the core behavior. However, there is no output schema and the description does not mention return values or potential errors, but this is a minor gap for a setter operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains what 'about' is (the description text) and implies 'peer' is a channel/supergroup, but it does not clarify the format of peer or the purpose of accountId. For 3 parameters, this is insufficient.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: setting the description of a channel/supergroup. It uses a specific verb ('set') and resource ('description of a channel/supergroup'), and it is distinct from sibling tools like edit_title and update_profile.

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 clearly states the tool is for channel/supergroup descriptions, which implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use edit_title for the title'.

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