Change the title of a chat/channel

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

Annotations declare idempotentHint and openWorldHint, which already communicate safety and side-effect behavior. The description adds the constraint about supported peer types, but gives no further behavioral details like error cases or whether the title change is restricted by permissions. 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 entire description is a single brief sentence that immediately states the action and its scope. No filler words; each clause adds relevant 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?

With no output schema and minimal description, the tool fails to clarify parameter semantics (peer and accountId) and potential constraints. It is too sparse for practical use despite the annotations.

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?

The input schema provides no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), and the tool description does not explain the 'peer' or 'accountId' parameters. Only 'title' is self-explanatory, leaving the user to guess how to format peer references.

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 the specific verb 'Set a new title' and explicitly lists supported peer types (channels, supergroups, basic groups), which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like edit_topic or edit_about.

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 indicates the tool applies to channels, supergroups, and basic groups, providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives, such as edit_topic for topic titles.

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